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
Of course, none of THOSE people are driving 20-year-old cars, or even new Hyundais, themselves. And, of course, comparing a two-door, 1,600 lb., 1990 car to a four-door, 2,900 lb., 2007 car simply defies reality. But our host, Edmunds, offers an accurate comparison of all models with its TCO.
The True Cost to Own compares factors such as depreciation, financing, fuel .... you name it. It figures everything over a five year span, and comes up with a cost per mile for each car.
The Honda Civic Hybrid costs 44 cents per mile to own. The standard Honda Civic EX costs 43 cents. The Toyota Corolla costs 44 cents. Virtually no difference.
My favorite is the Hyundai Accent. That little $13,000 bargain actually costs you 42 cents per mile. So the big savings from driving a Hyundai instead of a Honda -- $320 per year.
Big deal.
.
Another note: The other day I went and looked at the Volvo C30. if any of you folks are looking to downsize a little, you should check that out. I tried the 6-speed manual; very nice action and it has good mpg; and probably good safety. Sweden this summer sounds good on the European delivery program.
1 more note: I was contemplating at what point would I really curtail extra driving and that was at about $6/gal. It really wouldn't hurt my budget though until about $10/gal.
My favorite is the Hyundai Accent. That little $13,000 bargain actually costs you 42 cents per mile. So the big savings from driving a Hyundai instead of a Honda -- $320 per year.
I guess those TCO's might be good as a rough comparison tool, but as the old saying goes, your mileage may vary. I've kept pretty good records of my 2000 Intrepid since the day I bought it, a little over 8 years ago. Over the course of 8 years and almost 140,000 miles, I figure it's come out to 33 cents per mile. And that's including gas, insurance, repairs, maintenance, registration, financing, and even depreciating the car down to zero.
But then, since I got an Intrepid to come out so cheap, it makes me wonder how well I'd do with an economy car? I'd save on the purchase price and on fuel economy. I'd imagine insurance would be about the same. Possibly it might be more, because sometimes they'll hit little cars with a surcharge since they're often viewed to be unsafe. Financing would actually be more. Unless I pay cash for it, or could wrangle 0.9% financing like I did with the Intrepid. One thing that would really hurt my TCO nowadays though, is simply that I don't drive that much anymore. Edmund's figures 15,000 miles per year in their calculations. I hit 100,000 miles after 5 years, and even though I've slowed down lately, 140K in 8 years still averages out to 17,500 per year. I'm probably down to about 5-6K per year now though, so by the time the car is 10 years old (if I still have it by then), that would get my average down to 15K per year.
But if I bought a new car, it would start off with only going 5-6K per year, and I think that would inflate the TCO. Even though I'd be saving in fuel, on a per-mile basis it wouldn't help me. And stuff like financing, depreciation, etc, would be spread over fewer miles.
Of course, none of THOSE people are driving 20-year-old cars, or even new Hyundais
Good points. You've highlighted what's got me interested in a Camry hybrid-no real $$ risk (and yes, I'm ignoring the fears of catastrophic mechanical problems with the hybrid system). So if there's not a $$ downside at $3/gallon, then there's big upside if price spikes to $5 or $6/gallon. Of course, this only applies to economy hybrids, not 'performance' hybrids.
Then the amount of maintenance cost does not reflect what a prudent and careful owner may find to be the cost. Look at the sludge engines Toyota experiences from several years ago with a 7500 mile (or was it 10000mi) recommendation for oil changes. Prudent owners looked at that and doubled their oil change cost at 3000 miles!!! The same is true for other maintenance through the year.
I'm concerned about sealed ball joints requiring no grease jobs. Does that save money. I'll bet not. There is going to be a replacement cost at some point for these no maintenance cost sealed joints.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That's something I've heard about, too, that the totally-sealed suspension systems typically won't last as long as a system that you have to lube periodically. Presuming, of course, that it actually IS lubed when it's supposed to be!
However, my 2000 Intrepid's ball joints are still fine at 140,000 miles. I did have to have both bearing hubs replaced in 2007, however. There was some other part up in there that had to be replaced as well, but I forget what it was now. I think my uncle's '03 Corolla has about 150,000 miles on it now, and I don't think it's ever needed any suspension work.
Then the amount of maintenance cost does not reflect what a prudent and careful owner may find to be the cost. Look at the sludge engines Toyota experiences from several years ago with a 7500 mile (or was it 10000mi) recommendation for oil changes. Prudent owners looked at that and doubled their oil change cost at 3000 miles!!! The same is true for other maintenance through the year.
I'm convinced to this day that stuff like this is the primary reason Chrysler transmissions don't hold up. My Intrepid's owner's manual calls for servicing the tranny every 100,000 miles on "Schedule A", and every 50,000 on "Schedule B". Of course they're going to tell you that...the warranty on that car was only good for 36,000 miles! I've had my tranny serviced every 30K miles, just to play it safe, and never had a bit of trouble with it. I think my uncle does that with his Corolla, too.
Next year our LS400 bought new in 1989 will be that old. It will probably be under 100k miles. If I thought any currently built car would last that long without expensive repair costs, I would be interested in buying one. I am wondering if the Sequoia I just bought will be worth keeping after the 7 year warranty expires. I am sure it will not reach the 75k miles by then.
If I was so unfortunate as to have a long commute, I would consider the hybrids as you have. I am more interested in longevity than high mileage. That skews the Edmund's TCO. They need to have variables such as mileage, interest and insurance cost.
Edmund's should also add POM (peace of Mind) for the safety factor in driving a large heavy vehicle vs an econobox.
Hmm, well my commute is short, about 5 miles each way, usually minimal traffic although I occasionally get stuck in stop and go. But I do a lot of other driving, so my overall ratio is probably about 1/3 city, 2/3 highway. I try to stick to speed limits (65 on local freeways, 40 on most local streets) for the express purpose of saving gas. I also do the other little things you are supposed to do, like combining errands to avoid lots of really short trips, keeping the tires inflated and the car tuned, etc etc.
When I bought the Echo, before the 2008 EPA revamp, it was rated at 34/41. I do think that the EPA rating system in general is very inconsistent, as it has been easy to exceed the ratings on many cars I have owned, while for others (like my current Matrix) my running average has fallen in between the city and highway numbers. All the numbers are now for 2008 is lower, they are not a better representation of what mileage individuals will actually get. I don't think they are that great a basis for comparison.
And I must say I was just reading something again yesterday in one of the car mags (C&D maybe?) where they referred to the EPA mileage ratings as "a total joke that no-one will ever get near" . I am sooo tired of seeing that written everywhere. There are plenty of people out there making those numbers every day, it's only the speed mavens (including pretty much all professional car reviewers, from what I can tell) who have no chance of making them.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I totally agree. I have never had a problem matching or getting better mileage than the EPA numbers. It was only when the exaggerated mileage figures for the hybrids came out that it became an issue. So instead of properly testing the hybrids. The EPA makes up a one size fits all mathematical formula for all vehicles. I think the new figures are low for all but the hybrids. Makes you wonder what the agenda is at the EPA.
Yeah, it'd be nice if they had an online calculator where you could put in some of your own variables, like insurance, how many miles you drive, your own financing terms, etc. For instance, looking at a 2008 Charger SXT, they estimate a total of $4606 in finance charges for 5 years. Ain't no way in hell I'm gonna pay that much to finance it! I'd either save up to pay cash for it, or pay it down as quickly as possible. Insurance, over the course of 5 years, they estimate to be $10,333. In my case, I doubt it if would be over $1000 per year, or $5K for the whole term.
They also estimate maintenance/repairs to come in around $5000 combined, over the course of 5 years/75K miles. That thing better not cost that much to maintain/repair! Over that course I could see it needing, at the most, two sets of tires, two sets of front brake pads, one set of rear pads, two transmission services, a coolant flush, and maybe a set of spark plugs and new belts. Oh, and 25 oil changes if you do every 3K, and maybe 5 air filters and a few pcv valves.
Still, I guess the TCO is a good basic tool. If you see one car costing more than another for their set of circumstances, I guess it's a safe bet that it'll cost more under your own set of circumstances...even if the actual figures are more or less than Edmund's estimates.
I initially read that as .30 cents a mile TCO and thought "wow."
It's been a year since I recalculated my numbers, but my '99 Quest is running around .35 a mile to own an operate. Just operational costs are running about .19 a mile.
In other words, what do you get back from it?
TCO is your input, TBO is the output.
In the example mentioned, the HCH has a TCO of 44 cents/mile, while the EX is 43 cents/mile. But the EX is more fun.
Gary's Sequoia adds a ton more utility. You could pick stuff up yourself instead of having to pay to have it delivered. You can fit twice as many people inside, as well.
So in some ways you can benefit up to twice as much as you would vs. a compact hybrid car.
All I'm saying is it's good to look at TCO, but also consider what it accomplishes for you.
I consistently drive about 10 mph over the posted limit and have achieved or exceeded the old EPA figures in every car I've owned. IMO, the fuel savings from slowing down are overstated. One of my cars has a manual 5 speed. 40 mph is too slow for 5th gear but 50 mph isn't. I'd bet a lot of money that I'm getting better mileage at 50 mph in 5th gear than 40 mph in 4th gear. Can you drive an Echo in 5th gear at 40 mph? If not you might be better off speeding up a little.
The slowest I will drive the Echo in fifth is about 50, and I am very mindful of the potential for lugging it, so I don't usually get into fifth on the surface streets (there are lots of little reasons - too much speed and grade variance on city streets, I like to have a little more braking from engine compression which I get in the lower gear, etc). But you're right, if I was happy with a constant speed of 50 in town, I am sure there would be little if any extra gas consumption in doing it.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I dunno; the left ball joint for the swaybar end link on my '88 Sentra finally popped out of the socket around 260,000 miles. Considering what a pain in the butt it was to get off, I believe it was the original. Metallurgy on stuff like that is a lot better now than it was in the bad old days, and they will pretty much last the life of the car as long as you keep the crud out of them.
Looks like they're doing the following right now...
$2000 cash back or:
$500 cash back with 0% for 3 years
$500 cash back with 2.9% for 4 years
$500 cash back with 3.9% for 5 years
$500 cash back with 5.9% for 6 years
So that actually doesn't sound too bad, but still not enough to tempt me into a new car. At least not while my Intrepid is still running well.
So in some ways you can benefit up to twice as much as you would vs. a compact hybrid car.
All I'm saying is it's good to look at TCO, but also consider what it accomplishes for you.
I think a truthful assessment of needs is important here. For the once-ever-five-years trip to Home Depot for appliances you might be better off having it delivered or renting their $20 truck.
I feel we have the best of both worlds with the Legacy wagon, its 2700 lb towing capacity coupled with a $20/day 5x8 trailer rental, we have the cargo capacity when needed. When we don't need that much room, the skybox on the Yakima cross-bars works great on trips. When we are driving around town sans trailer and rack, we get mileage in the high 20s and low 30s.
Oh, and when I do landscaping, I would much rather have it delivered then have that stinky stuff in my car/SUV or whatever.
I just priced a Charger R/T for someone several minutes ago. Wherever he lives there is a current $3,000 rebate which expires 02/29/2008.
I have a love/hate relationship with gagets being that I make my living from fixing computers. The Prius may seem overly complicated, but it has a fairly reasonable track record over the last 6-8 years with owners reporting breaking the 100K mark. I will give them the benifit of the doubt for now, I love showing off all the cool gagets to new passengers and hearing them ooh and ah when the MPG duhicky hits 99 Miles Per Gallon.
I have a friend that moved from LA to here (Richmond, VA) and feel for you about the CA regs. You would think with all the regulation that the LA smog would have cleared up by now!
I like gadgets also. My concern with the rapid changes being made with respect to computerized vehicles is the lack of support past 10 years. People are waiting for months to get cars fixed that are only 1-5 years old or less due to lack of replacement parts. This is all makers domestic and foreign. The more parts the more problems. I am not picking on hybrids for any reason other than the 30% more parts they contain. You know what they say "Parts is Parts"
I think the cost of the car per month and subsequent repairs after the warranty will continue to be much more than the price of fuel. When I say cost per month I mean the amortized cost whether you pay cash or borrow to buy.
Here is some info I found on it. NiMH battery pack 1000 lbs. I also tried to find any evidence that the EV-1 was ever crash tested. I did find where it was only given the go ahead by the EPA and CARB as a lease to be returned to GM for analysis. The main reason was the batteries were only expected to last 5 years and replacement cost to GM was $20,000. That is about the same as the price Toyota lists for their NiMH replacement battery for the RAV4 EV.
http://avt.inl.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/toyrav98.pdf
So what your saying is, amazingly, 15 years ago battery technology wasn't strong enough to support the needs of an EV? I wonder how long the battery in a laptop lasted? Was it long enough to play a DVD? Oh wait, DVDs weren't invented yet...
As far as the RAV4 EV I suspect that since it was basically the same structurally as the ICE version it didn't need to be crash tested. Are Honda and Toyota required to crash test the Civic and Camry hybrids? As you pointed out the extra 630 lbs was do primarily to the battery pack. Weren't these located beneath the passenger compartment? They actually lowered the center of gravity. I don't see how extra mass positioned here should make a vehicle perform worse in a crash test.
It was actually less than 10 years ago and we are still using the same NiMH technology in the hybrids. The big difference is the charge and discharge rates used by Toyota will give the battery a longer life supposedly. There are many cases of Honda Insights with badly deteriorated NiMH batteries. I do not know if Honda is replacing them under the strict EPA/CARB warranty mandate.
The batteries in the RAV4 EV were sufficient for my needs then and now. The expense was and is the major roadblock to selling EVs currently.
Laptop batteries are mostly Li-Ion at this time. As I am sure you know millions of them were recalled due to fire hazard. That being the main reason they are not in any production vehicles as of yet.
I don't understand why a compromise on safety cannot be reached. Some vehicles could be rated for non-freeway driving. They do it with motorcycles & scooters all the time. The Xebra was built to exploit the gap in those laws.
Of course that is of little concern until the price of batteries comes down to a reasonable point. Batteries were a problem in the early 1900s EVs, and still are today. If you look at the EU where gas prices are well on their way to $10 per gallon and they have not found a solution to the problem. Other than using diesel.
What I am going to do when gas is $4? Do what I am doing now. Walking when I can for errands, driving only when I have to. Take Mass transit when I can too. Then get used to it like I did when gas went to 2.00 a gallon.
The first crash test result I see for the Prius at the NHTSA is on the '04 model.
I don't see any DOT motor vehicle safety standards waivers for the Prius except one for it and the Honda Insight to amend the starter interlock requirements so the car can be stopped and restarted automatically. (link)
Just curious where you saw this, cause I can't find it.
The trailer is more useful for dirty loads, too.
I have used the van to haul building materials (drywall, lattice, plywood), though, on at least 3 occasions. We've also taken long road trips with 2 familes' worth of people and gear on 3 occasions. That plus the occasional kids' car pool to after school events, so our extra space (minivan) is being put to good use.
I still want a trailer, though, in fact I may add a hitch to the van.
I need some stones for landscaping - maybe I will just have it delivered this time.
People were talking $4 gas last year, yet I never actually paid more than $3 per gallon. On top of that I got a Shell card for a 5% discount on gas, so technically I haven't paid more than $2.85.
Still haven't, actually. That's a far cry from $5.
Pick a car with a lot of range. That gives you time to shop around for gas. My rule is I fill up when I see cheap gas and need at least half a tank.
C'mon, no one believes everything a dealer or salesperson says. :P
So since I don't get gas more than once every 2-3 weeks, I usually get $0.30 off per gal. If gas goes up I'll start filling my house with canned goods.
Make sure it is Top Tier certified (Google search). I used to buy whatever cheap gas I could find for my cars years ago and I suspect that was the reason for some engine problems I had to deal with later on.
People might be surprised by some of the big names that didn't make the Top Tier certification list. Don't just assume because it's a well-known brand.
On a slightly different note, I brought my vehicle 17 miles to work today and didn't use a drop of gas.
I have found that mini-vans excel at hauling people or goods, but when asked to do both there is an issue. Big bulky lightweight stuff gets tossed in the cargo box and strapped to the roof for the few times a year this is an issue. Alternatively, you can always pick up a small cargo trailer and drag it behind you.
NEW CAR ASSESSMENT TEST, VEHICLE INTO BARRIER
Vehicle (1):1997 GMC EV1
While it was tested I do not have the software to interpret the data. But it was tested.
Glad to hear about how much better smog is in CA gives us a little hope.
One last thing about the Prius. Here in Richmond VA, they treat their Prius owners at my Toyota dealership like royalty. For example I was taking my Prius in for service to drop off on a Sunday (the Car dealers are closed on Sundays here) and the General Manager and the Service Manager were in the showroom working on paperwork. They both came out - addressed me by name (it was a month since I bought the car), opened the service bay and drove my car inside for me. They seemed genuinely happy to see me and made sure I was happy with the car. In contrast the Honda dealer here made us feel like they were doing us a favor showing us a car.
Apples and oranges. Those products are made in two completely different processes. Ethanol is made by fermenting grain (think corn-based beer) and bio-diesel is made from vegetable oil (generally soybeans in the US). The only place the two processes intersect is when the farmer decides what crop to plant.
But, with that being said, you can piggyback a bio-diesel plant onto an ethanol plant. I was at a presentation by one of the ethanol companies that passed around a vial of a syrupy by-product of ethanol production. It looked like runny maple syrup. He was telling me that they can get this stuff from the dryers and turn it into bio-diesel. I don't recall what the effect of removing this from the DDGS had on the nutritional value of the DDGS as a feed for livestock.
Ah but you used oil unless you have synthetic lube on the chain, and your tires didn't wear. And if you ate extra food for that energy, then your responsible for some of the extra diesel that farm tractor burned, and that truck used to bring the food to the store.