Hi,

I was reading pp. 48 of the July "Consumer Reports" and found they have a new way to calculate cost per MPG:

Price_per_MPG = vehicle_cost / MPG

Now we can quibble about fuel, driving styles, EPA numbers and duration of ownership but this is a fairly simple relationship that on the face of it appears to be a fair number for the privilege of driving the car off the lot. With this restriction, "Consumer Reports" limited their top table to vehicles that have top ratings, quality first:

• $464 - Fit manual
• $476 - Fit base
• $540 - Prius
• $576 - Mazda3
• $591 - Prius touring
• $596 - Nissan Verse
• $605 - Civic hybrid
• $607 - Civic EX manual
• $650 - Hyundai Elantra GLS
• $608 - Scion tC

In reality, we own our cars for multiple years and a family of curves describe the car ownership cost over the years. Later today I'll try to add the formulas and graphs that show actual cost of ownership, what it cost as soon as the car leaves the dealer lot. Still, as a first order approximation, this "Consumer Reports" formula isn't bad ... until you drive off the lot.

Bob Wilson

ps. I was looking for the article "Gas-saving gadgets DON'T WORK" only to find three, disappointing weak paragraphs that ignore the latest fad, hydrogen electrolysis systems.

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

This is terrific subject IMO.

While I am not an opponent to hybrid cars, I think allot of people overlook the more obvious way to cut expenses when changing out of a gas guzzler; getting an inexpensive compact/subcompact. As a strictly financial exercise, our Ford Escort cost us $2500, used of course, and returns around 35 mpg average for a little over 71 $/MPG.

Obviously one needs to define the period of ownership and include all maintenance costs during that period to get an accurate read of the true cost of ownership, but this offers an engaging starting point IMO.

LiberalImage.com

This article makes sense. I'm not overly environmentally conscious but bought my car running from peak oil and knowing that every summer prices would spike significantly and not recede to previous equilibrium in the winter.

My three final choices were the Scion tC, the Corolla and the Civic Hybrid and were based on lowest estimated TCO over a 10-15 year period. Manual transmission cars were eliminated and the Fit, Verse, Mazda3 and Prius for styling reasons (not a fan of hatchbacks). The GLS lacks air conditioning and an automatic transmission unless you sink $2,600 more into it, and its a Hyundai (less track record).

Not sure I was as conscious about these variables at the time but I wound up with what made sense for me and couldn't be happier. I'm surprised the Corolla didn't make the list.

CR also started a section on car cost over 5 years, and its top-ten was different from what you see above. It factored in maintenance, fuel, and some other things. They had this list available to the public for a short while but now it will require a subscription to see. What I remember was that none of the hybrids were in the top-ten. One vehicle that was in the top-ten was the Chevrolet Aveo -- one of CR's worst-rated cars. Congratulations, GM.

so, that makes my insight $323, assuming 21K to buy it new and 65 mpg average city+highway. or, using the figures i actually paid: $101, assuming 7100 to buy and fix it up, and 70 mpg average since i bought it. not too bad!

2000 Honda Insight. Kenwood MP3 head unit, Blaupunkt door speakers, dual Cobalt amps, 3 MTX stealth subs, 4th very-high-mounted brake light, Sumitomo tires, yellow-top, hot induction air mod, tinted, SG2, MIMA, center armrest.


best tank 82 mpg

This may solve a problem I'd had in the past with vehicle accounting, separating:

• capital costs - what it takes to buy the vehicle. This price is paid even if the vehicle never drives another mile.
• operational costs - what it takes to keep it rolling. This price is variable by avoiding optional, quality of life trips.

Past 'life cycle' analysis try to combine the two and this gets really confusing because the optional travel is so hard to quantify. But using the 'Price / MPG' as the capital cost, gives a good metric of ownership that incorporates some future operational cost. Like an AC efficiency rating, it gives us a clean way to rate purchase and mileage.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

The issue in a number of these vehicles is the relative compromise in comfort and capacity. While the Fit is a decent car, the driving experience is decidedly noisy and rough. And, for the price points shown, the equipment levels vary considerably, further muddying the comparison.

I also find it interesting they compared the Prius Touring, as it's considerably more 'tarted up' than the other vehicles on the list. The 'base' Prius (at a price point at least $5K less) would work out a bit differently.
Given a Prius that cost $22K, the ratio is $478 at its EPA combined MPG. The equipment levels of a Prius at that price point would be more comparable to a 'base' Fit, and so is the ratio. FWIW, the base Prius has a few more toys than the 'base' Fit, which would need $ 1500 or so in additional equipment to come up to the same equipment level.