There are too many factors to take into consideration for just a simple answer. I have a '95 Crown Vic and a '03 F-350 diesel. I get mid 20's with the car and about 17-18 with the truck. I've even cracked the 20 MPG barrier with it a couple of times. If I wanted a yard of screened loam or a bunch of lumber, the truck obviously gets the nod. If I need to run up to Wally World with the kids, the car usually gets taken. However, there are times when I have taken the truck just to get some run time on it. It isn't good for any vehicle to just sit unused for long periods of time. If I haven't used the truck much in a couple of weeks I'll take it to work, a 40 mile commute each way, just to get it out and up to temp for a while. Does it cost more to operate? Of course it does, at least as far as fuel costs go. Long term, having to do major repairs due to non-use makes fuel costs seem insignificant.

I'm currently looking at hybrids to replace the Crown Vic when the Cash for Clunkers program gets up and running. If I had one I would take it most of the time but not always, pretty much like I do now. I would not drive any more or less, I'd just be getting better mileage and polluting less with a hybrid than with the 15 year old car I currently have.

 

I was watching a movie on tv that was made in the mid 70's. I saw a closeup shot of the gas prices at a service station. How about gas at 59.9 per gallon. I was driving a heavy '71 Olds 98 at the time with a big 455 engine. I remember well, it got 13 mpg, 14 if I easy peddled it. It would set you deep in the seat if you floored it. That was then and now is now, i'm all for good gas mileage.

 

I'd make the trip regardless or wait regardless. In other words, the fact I am driving my TCH doesn't have any impact on my decision to make a trip somwhere. Of course, I feel better about making the short run to get a movie or to the hardware when driving my TCH, and also I choose to drive my TCH over my 20MPG minivan whenever possible.

 

My wife and I always take my Tacoma on very short trips, (around town), we use the TCH for all other trips, (out of town).

 

This very unscientific and poorly constructed poll seems to indicate that in excess of one (27%) in four will drive more miles in a TCH than they would in a Suburban.
The first choice "I'd make the trip in the TCH, but not the Suburban" implied (or was meant to imply) that they'd make a trip in an efficient car that they wouldn't make in an inefficient car...thus driving more due to the efficiency.
While 18 votes probably isn't a statistically significant population, and again, the poll isn't set up properly, it was conducted in a forum populated by people who are probably more focused on their mileage than the general population...and over one in four admitted that they would drive more miles if they were in a car that got better mileage.
Imagine what a survey of the general population would reveal? (I think I know the answer)

 

None of the above really hit what I'd do. As a lazy person, I make the trip when its easiest for me. If not having the item is going to make my life tough for the week, I get it right away. If the drive is a bigger pain, I wait. It doesn't matter which vehicle is at my disposal.

Gas would have to rise to the point where buying it was painful for my budget before I started making short term adjustments. $4.50 a gallon is just high enough to make long term adjustments (e.g. buying eco-tires instead of performance).

 

I think the question is similar to this questions: Do you use more lights in your house when you use CFLs?

And my answer is I'm more likely to leave a light on in the house if I know it's a CFL.

 

Same with my wife...she refuses to turn them off because they don't use much electricity. I go from room to room turning them off.
I also pay the bills.
Connection?

 

Maybe it is just me, but I have to stop and think which are which in my house.

 

I think the connection of these 2 questions that people would use the same logic in answering both questions. We would be more likely to take an unnecessary trip in our economical car just as with a CFL I would be more likely to leave it on when I go out.

I definitely wouldn't leave a big 100 watt bulb burning in the house or take my wife's SUV on a short trip when my car was available. Efficient technology should give people more freedom (to take unnecessary trips) and flexibility (to have a lit house to come home to) and even as I say this, I feel the paradox of efficiency gnawing away at my logic.