Large SUV's
- Thread starter DBMaster
- Start date
- Status
Quote:
It's not that simple. Not everyone has gasoline cost at the top of their vehicle choice parameters
+1 its very low on my list of priorities if i like the car.
It's not that simple. Not everyone has gasoline cost at the top of their vehicle choice parameters
+1 its very low on my list of priorities if i like the car.
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted By: supton
. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
I don't care about the people who do not approve. They must have issues if they have to disapprove of something someone drives if they don't even know them.
That is the "I am better than you crowd" There is no need for those types.
. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
I don't care about the people who do not approve. They must have issues if they have to disapprove of something someone drives if they don't even know them.
That is the "I am better than you crowd" There is no need for those types.
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Originally Posted By: supton
. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
I don't care about the people who do not approve. They must have issues if they have to disapprove of something someone drives if
I still have a tough time with it. I've long tried to buy what I need, and been open to feedback all along--comes from being a part of my generation, I guess.
I'm well aware that I don't "need" a large vehicle and that by driving I'm contributing to our nation's large usage of fuel (large vehicle or not, I burn lots of fuel per year).
Originally Posted By: supton
. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
I don't care about the people who do not approve. They must have issues if they have to disapprove of something someone drives if
I still have a tough time with it. I've long tried to buy what I need, and been open to feedback all along--comes from being a part of my generation, I guess.
I'm well aware that I don't "need" a large vehicle and that by driving I'm contributing to our nation's large usage of fuel (large vehicle or not, I burn lots of fuel per year).
Originally Posted By: InhalingBullets
I manage a fleet of 1702 vehicles...from Prius' to F-550's. When factoring life costs(maintenance, tires, fuel, purchase cost) on all the vehicles across the board, the Tahoe has the lowest cost per mile.
While my fleet is miniscule it includes some 3500 vans and Silverados, too. None are known for economy.
However, their resale is so good it is amazing. My 05 Silverado purchased for 25k new just sold for 11k with 126000 miles on it.
Amazing value. And despite what non-owners say, great overall economy!
Few folks really know their true cost of ownership anyway, most are just pay as you go, living month to month...
I manage a fleet of 1702 vehicles...from Prius' to F-550's. When factoring life costs(maintenance, tires, fuel, purchase cost) on all the vehicles across the board, the Tahoe has the lowest cost per mile.
While my fleet is miniscule it includes some 3500 vans and Silverados, too. None are known for economy.
However, their resale is so good it is amazing. My 05 Silverado purchased for 25k new just sold for 11k with 126000 miles on it.
Amazing value. And despite what non-owners say, great overall economy!
Few folks really know their true cost of ownership anyway, most are just pay as you go, living month to month...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Win
Good grief, buy and drive whatever you want, who cares what someone else does?
First nice day, I'm taking the cover off the V12 and blowing through a tank of V Power. At 11 MPG in town, it won't take me long.
I've been driving my jeep. .. a bit more spirited than usual. Use it while it's cheap!
Good grief, buy and drive whatever you want, who cares what someone else does?
First nice day, I'm taking the cover off the V12 and blowing through a tank of V Power. At 11 MPG in town, it won't take me long.
I've been driving my jeep. .. a bit more spirited than usual. Use it while it's cheap!
Originally Posted By: supton
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
I heard on KRLD this morning that the GM plant in Arlington is working extra shifts and overtime to crank out full size SUV's. Sales have picked up with the drop in gas prices. One of the vehicles they build there is the Cadillac Escalade.
Alas, human beings are incapable of learning from their mistakes. I'm sure gas will NEVER go back up in price, right?
I see a plethera of these things around Austin/RR/Cedar park. Their LED tail-lights are WAY too bright at night when I'm sitting in traffic behind one and that funky cheese-grater grille...what's up with that? Not sure what they're going for, but the local Caddy dealers are really moving them.
I heard on KRLD this morning that the GM plant in Arlington is working extra shifts and overtime to crank out full size SUV's. Sales have picked up with the drop in gas prices. One of the vehicles they build there is the Cadillac Escalade.
Alas, human beings are incapable of learning from their mistakes. I'm sure gas will NEVER go back up in price, right?
I see a plethera of these things around Austin/RR/Cedar park. Their LED tail-lights are WAY too bright at night when I'm sitting in traffic behind one and that funky cheese-grater grille...what's up with that? Not sure what they're going for, but the local Caddy dealers are really moving them.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: supton
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Actually, Toyota had two - the Van Wagon and the Previa
Originally Posted By: supton
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: supton
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Actually, Toyota had two - the Van Wagon and the Previa
Yep and the best one was the Chevy Astro and GMC Safaris. True body on frame and bulletproof 4.3V6. AWD was also available.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: supton
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Yep and the best one was the Chevy Astro and GMC Safaris. True body on frame and bulletproof 4.3V6. AWD was also available.
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Actually, Toyota had two - the Van Wagon and the Previa
Pretty sure the original Mazda MPV was RWD, as well.
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Pretty sure the original Mazda MPV was RWD, as well.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Yep and the best one was the Chevy Astro and GMC Safaris. True body on frame and bulletproof 4.3V6. AWD was also available.
Wow. Aerostars and 4.3L Astro's. It just goes to show you how different people have different experiences and take-aways.
Both are vehicles that my friends had enormous expensive ongoing problems with. (Friends, by the way, that take good care of their vehicles, followed factory maintenance schedules and came to me with sad "what is going wrong here" cries for help.) All those friends drive Toyotas and Hondas now.
Come to think of it, another late friend had a 300K+ Astro that just wouldn't die. He was an ME, though. I think you have to get past the OEM plastic intake manifold issues and then they are OK.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Yep and the best one was the Chevy Astro and GMC Safaris. True body on frame and bulletproof 4.3V6. AWD was also available.
Wow. Aerostars and 4.3L Astro's. It just goes to show you how different people have different experiences and take-aways.
Both are vehicles that my friends had enormous expensive ongoing problems with. (Friends, by the way, that take good care of their vehicles, followed factory maintenance schedules and came to me with sad "what is going wrong here" cries for help.) All those friends drive Toyotas and Hondas now.
Come to think of it, another late friend had a 300K+ Astro that just wouldn't die. He was an ME, though. I think you have to get past the OEM plastic intake manifold issues and then they are OK.
Originally Posted By: supton
Astro would do pretty good for what I want, outside of a hard to work on engine. Alas, those vehicles came and went.
I think they were made with AWD until 2006 or so. My cousin in BC wanted one but the wife put her foot down. They have an AWD Sienna which seems to be fine, just 3 times as expensive as the nice Astro's he looked at...
Astro would do pretty good for what I want, outside of a hard to work on engine. Alas, those vehicles came and went.
I think they were made with AWD until 2006 or so. My cousin in BC wanted one but the wife put her foot down. They have an AWD Sienna which seems to be fine, just 3 times as expensive as the nice Astro's he looked at...
I'm somewhat unsold on the AWD Astro's, they used some English transfer case which got the job done, and seems to have few complaints: but I'm not sure spares are out there. A case where I wouldn't mind having just RWD and park it for the winter, then it becomes "classic" RWD setup, simple(r) to work on etc.
Ironically my truck right now is rolling at 17mpg; back in the day dad said his Astro got 18mpg. RWD TBI 4.3 with tow. Although he didn't have second thoughts about pulling a 20' plus travel trailer with his--I'd be hesitant to do that with my truck!
My large SUV is a truck, and I like it.
With a cap on the back I guess it's a poor simulation of a Suburban, albeit I don't care about putting smelly trash in there.
Ironically my truck right now is rolling at 17mpg; back in the day dad said his Astro got 18mpg. RWD TBI 4.3 with tow. Although he didn't have second thoughts about pulling a 20' plus travel trailer with his--I'd be hesitant to do that with my truck!
My large SUV is a truck, and I like it.
You could even bolt down another row of seats back there, in case the inlaws want to travel with you...
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
You could even bolt down another row of seats back there, in case the inlaws want to travel with you...
Haw! I've considered that, too!
But seriously, with a full size pickup these days an extended cab design with 4 full size doors is very much like a large SUV but only seats 5 or 6 folks comfortably (inside). You just have more cargo space...
You could even bolt down another row of seats back there, in case the inlaws want to travel with you...
Haw! I've considered that, too!
But seriously, with a full size pickup these days an extended cab design with 4 full size doors is very much like a large SUV but only seats 5 or 6 folks comfortably (inside). You just have more cargo space...
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: supton
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Actually, Toyota had two - the Van Wagon and the Previa
Of the vehicles you cite, the early RWD Toyota, Nissan & Mitsu were home market commercial vehicles on very short wheelbases and are more accurately described as microvans. They had dodgy handling and no refinement. IIRC, Nissan's were plagued with engine fires and Nissan tried to buy all of those sold back.
The Astro was an overweight pig of a vehicle.
The Vanagon (we owned one and really liked it) and the Previa both offer huge interior volume, especially the VW and both could be had with AWD in certain years. Neither met my criteria of low priced, though and the Vanagon had no power whether equipped with the Type IV or the later Wasserboxer.
The Previa only had power in the supercharged versions.
Both the Vanagon and the Previa are very durable vehicles.
Our Vanagon was actually rated to carry more than 1900 lbs, but I don't think I'd want to tow much with one.
This leaves the Aerostar, cheap to buy, decent tow capacity, good fuel economy and no pesky LIM gasket changes needed.
We found the Aerostar to be one of our efficient purchases.
Less than 15K brand new and very useful for the 175K and thirteen years we had it.
The only thing I ever had to do to it other than brakes and tires was a starter replacement.
Even the AC remained ice cold with no service needed.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: supton
I drive lots of miles, so I usually am looking at mpg. But when I am trying to justify a car purchase I'm also looking at depreciation, repairs, etc; and boiling them into either TCO or cost/mile. At least that is true for my cars. My truck, err, I decided to look it as a luxury and was much more irrational about it.
Hard to beat a large do-all vehicle. 'cept for purchase and running costs. And parking. And disapproval from those who don't own large vehicles.
Ford once made a RWD minivan that fit this bill.
It was even available in an entended version if you needed even more room and could be bought with AWD.
We averaged better than 20 mpg with ours over 175K trouble free miles.
Ford built the last of these in 1997 and there has been nothing with the same combination of low price, operating economy and durability/reliabilty since.
A large SUV is a poor substitute for an Aerostar.
Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, GM, and Volkswagen all built RWD minvans.
Of the vehicles you cite, the early RWD Toyota, Nissan & Mitsu were home market commercial vehicles on very short wheelbases and are more accurately described as microvans. They had dodgy handling and no refinement. IIRC, Nissan's were plagued with engine fires and Nissan tried to buy all of those sold back.
The Astro was an overweight pig of a vehicle.
The Vanagon (we owned one and really liked it) and the Previa both offer huge interior volume, especially the VW and both could be had with AWD in certain years. Neither met my criteria of low priced, though and the Vanagon had no power whether equipped with the Type IV or the later Wasserboxer.
The Previa only had power in the supercharged versions.
Both the Vanagon and the Previa are very durable vehicles.
Our Vanagon was actually rated to carry more than 1900 lbs, but I don't think I'd want to tow much with one.
This leaves the Aerostar, cheap to buy, decent tow capacity, good fuel economy and no pesky LIM gasket changes needed.
We found the Aerostar to be one of our efficient purchases.
Less than 15K brand new and very useful for the 175K and thirteen years we had it.
The only thing I ever had to do to it other than brakes and tires was a starter replacement.
Even the AC remained ice cold with no service needed.
- Status
Similar threads
