Financial cost of personal mobility

[CharlieBauer]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
There have been a number of posts showing that buying used saves nothing over buying new since the lower acquisition cost is typically made up for in more immediate need for maintenance and repair.
I've bought both new and used and have not typically found buying new to be any more costly over the lifecycle of a car if you run the car for its entire practical lifespan and then sell it as a beater. A used car is much farther along the path to beaterdom than is one bought new and with a new car you control maintenance and know its history from day 1 which will never be the case with one bought used.
If you want to own something you couldn't have afforded new or that you'd have considered simply too extravagant, like the guy on here who bought a used E class with all the toys for pennies on the new dollar, then that's a different story.


Depreciation over the first years, especially year one, is much higher than the equivalent number of years of maintenance.

Many years later when depreciation is much less, sure, your point starts to have potential validity.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: danez_yoda
Uber is 1.55 / mile. By your own account you drove over 1million miles over 30 years. That wouls have cost you 1.5mil instead of 180k. Be happy.

Of course, if one is relying on Uber, taxis, or public transit, one is often more judicious about one's trips. One can accumulate a lot of miles that are fairly banal, to say the least. Of course, if one is commuting, that's another matter altogether, but I could certainly reduce my costs (and mileage I accumulate, by probably 35 km a day) very significantly by taking a bus to the office and home. Of course, I'm as good as anyone else about having excuses about not wanting to do so.

 

[SeaJay]

It costs lots of money to keep a decent roof over your head, decent food on the table, nice looking clothes to wear, entertainment and vacations to keep one's sanity, and a bunch of other things, including transportation.

Life ain't cheap which is why we work the kind of crazy hours we do rather than just living off of the land like our ancestors did a few hundred years ago.

 

[Andrew1972]

My in-laws are so frugal and buy $3000-$8000 used vehicles and manage to keep them a really long time with bare minimum maintenance.

They seek non desirable vehicles like a brown Windstar 5 years old with 45k for $4500, 05 Saturn electric blue VUE for $6k with only 40k that was 5 years old, RWD Silverado with 45k that was over 10 years old. They tend to hang onto these cars 8-10 years and do nothing major.I think Ford bought the Windstar back for $2500 due to ABC New expose on severe defect and it was a junk pile at best.

Instead of wasting money on vehicles they purchased some real estate including ocean/beach front lot/dilapated cottage in Northern MA they rebuilt. They now live at a $900k home. They also own a ski home. Essentially they are millionaires in terms of property with two vehicles worth about $9k in driveway.

Vehicles do not have to be expensive to own if you are not picky and don't get over zealous on maintaining them perfectly. My parents just hang onto the base model of whatever for 15-20 years and also keep expenses way down. 86 AMC Eagles->2000 Base Forester->2017 Outback base.

 

[supton]

I remember in college, realizing I couldn't afford to keep my car on the road, and having to go carless. Hated it at first but then realized the perks, which were largely financial. Sometimes today I'd love to get back to not having to depend on a car, but being able to bike or walk to every place I need to be on a daily basis.

Problem is, I don't like cities, and I wound up in tech, so it's kinda rough if not impossible. Maybe some day I'll pull off a career change.

 

[javacontour]

Let's see, my 1994 Geo Prizm was about $0.13/mile to drive for all costs save car insurance. I'm not sure I still have the data, but the final values were posted here.

About 1/2 of my costs were fuel over the approximately 150k miles I drove it over 6-7 years. Bought it with about 106k on the clock and sold it with 254k or 256k give or take.

Bought it for $2500 and sold it for $1300. So the costs for that 150k miles was about $19k. About 1/2 of that was fuel, so the remaining $9500 includes the $1200 the car cost me and the rest was Maintenance and Repair. Or probably just over $1k/year. That's probably three sets of tires, a boat load of oil and oil changes, and the rest was actual repairs.

I'm not sure a new car can get to that figure.

The per mile goes up for my 2003 Mazda Protege5 at $0.18/mile. Of course, I had to rebuild the engine the first month as I either missed something or dropped something in cylinder #1 when I was changing plugs, etc. The car was 2x as much as here is how the costs of ownership played out:

Per Mile 0.18
Total Costs $23918.25
Maintenance $7260.13
Purchase $5586.52 w/tax and tags
Fuel $11071.60

I think I got $1k for it when I traded it for my 2012 Mazda 3.

But even with an engine rebuild, fuel was almost 1/2 of the total costs.

I drove this for just under 133k miles over the course of 6 years.

My total costs over 6 years would only buy the low end new car today. And while maintenance and repairs were more than the cost of the car, most of what was done would have to be done to a new car. New cars wear out tires, batteries, struts, and require fluid and filter changes.

Other than the oil change, an A/C compressor and a lower control arm, (not counting the rebuild that was probably either my fault or the platinum pad on the spark plug giving way and making a mess of cylinder #1, it too was a reasonably reliable car.)

Why did I trade it? It probably needed $1k worth of tires, struts and a rear main seal replacement, so I let it go rather than throw another $1k into it. But I could have, and have no worries about driving it across the country.

So I'm a believer in the buy used and run it to between 225-275k miles.

We did get rid of oilBabe's 2002 Camry after 277k miles. She did buy it new and it was passed on to the kids as she drove a couple other cars.

Hopefully, we are past the handing down cars phase of our life.

 

[supton]

At some point I think you have to take inflation into account. I mean, back in 1998 or so I had a goal of keeping my summer driving's cost to $600 for a six month period, over 6,000 miles. $600 for all costs (gas, insurance, everything). I managed to hit that but boy I don't think it's doable today--not unless if I get real lucky.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: Reddy45
The freedom aspect is priceless to me. I don't think I could live a life where my transportation ability was determined by cabs, buses, train schedules, or the good graces of friends.

I think there was a time when communities were more tight knit and public transportation wasn't a risk, but nowadays we're all so polarized in our ways and opinions and pleasantries are just not a thing. So you can factor in the safety aspect of your own mobility.


This.

I live in Eastern Connecticut, and have to travel between sites for work. There is no way I could do this without my own vehicle, since I travel to sites based on need, sometimes critical. I also need to carry equipment and transport it to different sites, which could never happen with a bus.

When I went to college, I'd take the bus around campus when I could, but I still usually walked everywhere. I can see why Uber and forms of public transportation are popular in the city, but out here in the woods I doubt it will ever become popular because of the cost difference.

 

[exranger06]

There's a financial blogger (mrmoneymoustache.com) who is firm believer in living within 10 miles of your workplace, and bicycling or walking to work every day, and biking or walking for any errand that's 10 miles away or less. For any longer trip, use a small hatchback that gets over 30 mpg (that was bought used for about $6k of course). This guy retired when he was about 35 years old and has millions in the bank. Granted it wasn't possible by ONLY limiting car use, but it was really an eye-opener to how expensive operating cars are.

 

[Mr Nice]

Originally Posted By: exranger06
There's a financial blogger (mrmoneymoustache.com) who is firm believer in living within 10 miles of your workplace, and bicycling or walking to work every day, and biking or walking for any errand that's 10 miles away or less. For any longer trip, use a small hatchback that gets over 30 mpg (that was bought used for about $6k of course). This guy retired when he was about 35 years old and has millions in the bank. Granted it wasn't possible by ONLY limiting car use, but it was really an eye-opener to how expensive operating cars are.


I think some exaggerate their wealth. Mr MM is one of them.
I know a guy with a net worth of five million that would laugh at the idea of riding a bicycle or walking to work.

Sounds like Dave Ramsey's..... Rice and Beans, Beans and Rice diet. Very silly and comical advice.

I do agree that as a young adult don't try to fake it till you make it, you're only kidding yourself.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice

I think some exaggerate their wealth. Mr MM is one of them.
I know a guy with a net worth of five million that would laugh at the idea of riding a bicycle or walking to work.

Sounds like Dave Ramsey's..... Rice and Beans, Beans and Rice diet. Very silly and comical advice.

I do agree that as a young adult don't try to fake it till you make it, you're only kidding yourself.




Agreed. Don't try to fake it if you can't afford things, but also everyone's situation is different. Ride a bike to work? I could never do that. I live in a very hilly area, have to haul equipment, have lots of weather changes, etc. I'm sure administrators would be thrilled if I showed up to a meeting all sweaty from riding a bike there.

I used to work in the city, and I did take public transportation or walk when I could, but within reason.

I think people could make more of an impact on their financial stability if they just bought things they could afford instead of financing things they wanted but did not need.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Originally Posted By: exranger06
There's a financial blogger (mrmoneymoustache.com) who is firm believer in living within 10 miles of your workplace, and bicycling or walking to work every day, and biking or walking for any errand that's 10 miles away or less. For any longer trip, use a small hatchback that gets over 30 mpg (that was bought used for about $6k of course). This guy retired when he was about 35 years old and has millions in the bank. Granted it wasn't possible by ONLY limiting car use, but it was really an eye-opener to how expensive operating cars are.


I think some exaggerate their wealth. Mr MM is one of them.
I know a guy with a net worth of five million that would laugh at the idea of riding a bicycle or walking to work.

Sounds like Dave Ramsey's..... Rice and Beans, Beans and Rice diet. Very silly and comical advice.

I do agree that as a young adult don't try to fake it till you make it, you're only kidding yourself.



I think the point is the Mr. MM jumped off the treadmill in his youth and is living how he wants to. For him biking 10 miles to work a day is a way to keep in shape while saving money and time. It works for him, and he puts it out there that you don't have to be a slave to your suburban house, expensive cars and consumerist lifestyle, if you don't want too.

 

[gman2304]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
There have been a number of posts showing that buying used saves nothing over buying new since the lower acquisition cost is typically made up for in more immediate need for maintenance and repair.
I've bought both new and used and have not typically found buying new to be any more costly over the lifecycle of a car if you run the car for its entire practical lifespan and then sell it as a beater. A used car is much farther along the path to beaterdom than is one bought new and with a new car you control maintenance and know its history from day 1 which will never be the case with one bought used.
If you want to own something you couldn't have afforded new or that you'd have considered simply too extravagant, like the guy on here who bought a used E class with all the toys for pennies on the new dollar, then that's a different story.


I'm not sure where those posts saying buying used saves nothing are. Even the previous car I had, I got used at about 40% of the new car price. It was 3 years old and I drove it for 12 years. I don't think I spent anywhere near 60% of the purchase price in the last 3 years or even over the life of the car.
My last new vehicle was a 1995 Nissan pick up, $19,000 new, 4wd 5 speed manual 2.4 engine. I drove it for 19 years then sold it for $5,000. I then bought a one owner 2005 Chevy truck in 2014 with 162,000 miles for $7,000 and have had to replace two drive shaft u joints last year at a cost of $30. It currently has 194,000 miles. [I did have to replace the wiper blades this weekend]. I have owned 2 vehicles in the last 23 years. My wife has owned 2 Toyota Avalons and her current 2013 Lexus es350 in that same time period...all bought used and all nice and dependable cars. She keeps her cars an average of 7 to 8 years. By not having perpetual car payments, we have saved a boat load of money over the years.

 

[fdcg27]

Opinions vary.
I have no need to finance the mainstream cars we drive and I'll happily give up a few K to enjoy that first 100K of zero problems motoring.
Now, If you buy something with a depreciation curve like a downhill ski race course, like a Mercedes, BMW or Audi, then it only makes sense to buy used, since you'll not likely spend enough on repairs over your ownership of the vehicle to make up for the depreciation hit you'll have taken buying the car new.
This isn't the case with a Honda or a Subaru.
Heck, mid oughts Accords and Foresters are priced about the same as big Benzes, BMWs and Audis of the same period.
Food for thought.
I'll add that we're no longer inclined to drive penalty boxes, although we did back in the day.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Opinions vary.
I have no need to finance the mainstream cars we drive and I'll happily give up a few K to enjoy that first 100K of zero problems motoring.
Now, If you buy something with a depreciation curve like a downhill ski race course, like a Mercedes, BMW or Audi, then it only makes sense to buy used, since you'll not likely spend enough on repairs over your ownership of the vehicle to make up for the depreciation hit you'll have taken buying the car new.
This isn't the case with a Honda or a Subaru.
Heck, mid oughts Accords and Foresters are priced about the same as big Benzes, BMWs and Audis of the same period.
Food for thought.
I'll add that we're no longer inclined to drive penalty boxes, although we did back in the day.


Yeah, but to some, a Honda or Subaru is a penalty box. I think what you're missing is that the resale value on Honda and other imports are too badly skewed. On some American models and foreign, the depreciation is much worse. So yeah, it might make sense to buy a Toyota or Honda new rather than used because the 3 year depreciation isn't that much. But they're way higher on less desirable models like some American and Foreign makes which used to be the standard. It's why I had an American car initially, it was about 5k cheaper than the equivalent Toyota/Honda and parts were also cheaper because it wasn't an import. If you look at JD Powers, while the reliability might have been worse, it was usually expressed as number of problems per 100 cars, and it basically boiled down to a number like 120 or 180 problems per 100 cars. So while one make might not rank that high, it's not like it's 2-10 times worse, just a small bit. But people pay a lot more in terms of resale value for that perceived reliability that's not necessarily there. I can't believe that one guy that spent 20k at the dealer just to maintain a Subaru. My boss just spent $1200 on rear brakes for his Audi at the dealership. I did the rear brakes on my Mercedes last year for $70 in brake pads, rotors were still good, took me 1.5 hours.

 

[fdcg27]

Only an ignorant fool would consider an Accord or Forester to be a penalty box, or maybe someone of great pretention.
There is a reason that buyers pay a premium for certain brands as used cars.
Used Benzes can be bought for pennies on the dollar.
You already know this and that's also the reason that we've had four of them. They were very good and durable cars that were cheap to buy and cheap to own.
The reason that Hondas, Subies and Toyotas have high resale is either that they really are that good or that everyone who buys one is delusional.
Since the latter seems unlikely, I'd guess we have to go with the former.
The guy who spent 20K maintaining a flat six Outback either got hosed real bad or just made up a number.
Anyone with any Subaru experience knows this to be a laughable amount of money to have spent on a bunch of minor niggles, which is why I posted that it would have cost less to maintain a Ferrari in that thread.
We've had as many Subarus as we have Mercedes, so I know of where I speak.
We obviously differ on what makes sense in buying and using a car, which is fine.
I've owned Mercedes cars as I wrote above.
Do you have any experience with Subaru or Honda cars?
If not, you really can't comment on either.

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Yeah but if you buy well used you "know what to look for" thanks to those who ponied up the big bucks for dealer diagnostics.

The price of a lower control arm for saturns kept dropping over my decade tenure of owning them. I don't think this is isolated-- there are way more parts options for 10-15 year old cars.

And youtube videos on how to fix anything.

Well sure, if you're willing to drive something suited to the clients of the Southern Poverty Law Center and are willing and able to wrench it on a routine basis, then you can indeed drive something really cheap really cheaply.
My willingness to do so ended about thirty years ago, but YMMV.


Convenience (Inconvenience?) is a factor that should be computed with the rest. Crippling breakdowns of course are a magnitude worse than something that can wait for a mail-order part and a weekend evening to fix.

 

[Mr Nice]

Affluent folks wouldn't (should not) drive a Honda or Subaru.

I might get rid of RSX and buy an Impreza hatchback, Mazda3 hatchback or Civic hatchback.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Affluent folks wouldn't (should not) drive a Honda or Subaru.




lol

Okay, what should they drive? And what constitutes being affluent?

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Still, ~$180K would have paid for lots of cab rides and weekend car rentals and even though this represents a fairly small fraction of our discretionary income over that time, it's still a sobering total.


That's nothing. Do the same exercise for your house and be prepared for the real eye opener. Add up all the interest, taxes, repairs, remodels, and even things like mowing the lawn over, say 10, 20, 30 years. Easy to come up well over $1 million in a short period of time. And we hope that the house "appreciates" over that time period.