Speadsheet To Evaluate Car Choice?

[(PeteCresswell)]

Given that I have car "A", which is driven so-and-so many miles
per year and gets X mpg with gas at $Y per gallon and I'm
thinking about getting rid of car "A" - for $Z to buy car "B"
which gets so-and-so many MPG and costs such-and-so....

I'd think there must be hundreds of spreadsheets out there - or
even web pages - that would show the break-even point for such a
changeover.

Anybody know of none?

 

[Balanced View]

There is at least one trade in payback calculator thing on the
Edmunds.com site. It indicates if I were to trade my 11 mpg truck for an
Escape hybrid I'd start saving money in 54 years, since I don't drive a
whole lot.

Why do you guys use a worst case scenario all the time? Who says you
have to buy a brand new Escape?
Trade sideways to a similar vehicle to yours that gets better mileage,
that's what I did, traded a 23 mpg four
door sedan for a five year newer 37 mpg four door sedan.

Our daily drive now averages about140 miles a week, and with the newer
car I'm now burning 3.8 gallons of
gas as opposed to 6.08 gallons. At four bucks a gallon that would be a
saving of $9.12 a week or 474.24 a
year. I'm driving about half the national average, an average driver
would save almost $1000.00 a year.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Balanced View:

Why do you guys use a worst case scenario all the time? Who says you
have to buy a brand new Escape?
Trade sideways to a similar vehicle to yours that gets better mileage,
that's what I did, traded a 23 mpg four
door sedan for a five year newer 37 mpg four door sedan.

Our daily drive now averages about140 miles a week, and with the newer
car I'm now burning 3.8 gallons of
gas as opposed to 6.08 gallons. At four bucks a gallon that would be a
saving of $9.12 a week or 474.24 a
year. I'm driving about half the national average, an average driver
would save almost $1000.00 a year.

Good point.

Having said that...

I ran the Edmunds thingie against a proposed 2007 Honda Odyssey -
selling my '98 Suburban 4wd, which I've been figuring on nursing
along until at least 250k (it's got almost 170 on it now).

Edmunds' break even period was 204 months at 1,000 miles per
month with gasoline at $4.25/gallon

Applying my limited arithmetic skills, it seems like the payback
period competes closely with - or even exceeds the life of the
replacement vehicle....

Assuming a 2007 Oddssey would have at least 50k on it at trade
time, that would be a quarter million miles on the odo before it
broke even.

OTOH, running it against a 2007 Honda Element, the BE falls to
150,000 miles... but still that seems tb pushing it....

With a new Element, BEP is about 180,000 miles.


"Limited arithmetic skills" bc I suspect I'm missing a few things
here - like some sort of allowance for the ultimate life in
miles of the Suburban.

Any accountants out there?

 

[Vaughn Simon]

"Limited arithmetic skills" bc I suspect I'm missing a few things
here - like some sort of allowance for the ultimate life in
miles of the Suburban.

Here is where your judgment skills come in, not just arithmetic. Keeping the
Suburban for 200+ months is probably not a practical option. At some point,
increasing maintenance cost, decreasing parts availability, and decreasing
reliability need to be considered. Unfortunately, only one of those three items
can be fit into a spreadsheet.

At the end of the day it is still a judgement call, not just a math excercise.
[/QUOTE][/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Nothing personal, but if you are posting through Google Groups I may not receive
your message. Google refuses to control the flood of spam messages originating
in their system, so on any given day I may or may not have Google blocked. Try
a real NNTP server & news reader program and you will never go back. All you
need is access to an NNTP server (AKA "news server") and a news reader program.
You probably already have a news reader program in your computer (Hint: Outlook
Express). Assuming that your Usenet needs are modest, use
http://news.aioe.org/ for free and/or http://www.teranews.com/ for a one-time
$3.95 setup fee.
Will poofread for food.

 

[Balanced View]

I used the scenario that matches my situation.



I never buy used vehicles. The Escape is one of the few higher MPG
vehicles available that is still big enough to be useful.

I never buy new, the last couple were just off of two year leases with
less than 10,000 miles on them.
Saved money big time, and have never had a problem.

What exactly would be a sideways trade for a K3500 pickup that will
happily carry my 2,000# camper and tow my 10,000# trailer at the same
time?

Your case is hardly average, if what you say is truly the case you'd be
one of the few that actually need a 3500

My monthly mileage for trips where I could use a small vehicle runs
about 200-250 miles. Months that exceed that either include trips where
I have to use the big truck i.e. hauling the camper or trailer, or
include trips that I can put on my expense report.

Using your numbers there, even at $1k/yr savings, it would take a *long*
time to recover the cost of a vehicle change much less show any cost
savings, unless you limit yourself to buying used wrecks.

Saving gas is all good if you have money to throw away on "green"
fashion statements, but most of us need to spend out money more wisely.

As I said before, your case is not average for the vast majority of
North Americans. I save close to
$500.00 a year , the average driver would save 1000.00 a year. It's not
a "green fashion statement",
it's simple common sense when you trade to find the best bang for your
buck. I made no sacrifice
buying a four door Saturn sedan to replace a similar Ford sedan. Your
can do what you want, but
anyone that would drive a 3500 as a daily driver to commute to work that
doesn't use it for work
purposes isn't worried about money.

 

[Jim Al Tefft]

I agree with this philosophy. I will be trading a Ford F-150 SuperCab XL for
a Pontiac G8 GT, which gets 30+ miles on the highway, because it operates on
four cylinders, which the F-150 can't do. I anticipate decent savings on
gasoline usage on the highway at least.

fwtefftson

 

[[email protected]]

Of course these days it seems few people are even capable of calculating
the MPG their vehicle actually gets and blindly go by EPA estimates,
which in my experience have been quite a bit off for every vehicle I've
ever owned.

The '08 EPA estimates are lower than previous standards, and designed
to provide a genuine real-world estimate for most folks. Beyond that,
they're the best way to compare one vehicle to another, as opposed to
using anecdotes from owners who frequently only ever remember their
very best tank. Anyone with a vehicle '96 or newer, and who wants to
really track mileage (as well as a whole bunch of other stuff) can use
one of these http://scangauge.com/. Highly recommended, $155 delivered
from Ebay vendors. 4 gauges available full-time on the main screen. I
have mine set for instantaneous mpg, average mpg current trip, average
mpg current tank, and horsepower. Interesting to see the mileage drop
from 30 at highway speeds on level pavement, to 9 at far lower speeds
on a 10% grade, and also the effect extended idling has on average
mileage. Recently watched the horsepower jump from about 35 on wet
dirt at 40mph, to 85 driving through 6" of water as fast as I dared.
Good educational tool, can even save jackrabbit-start types some money
if they learn to change their habits.

Wayne

 

[Balanced View]

I
have mine set for instantaneous mpg, average mpg current trip, average
mpg current tank, and horsepower. Interesting to see the mileage drop
from 30 at highway speeds on level pavement, to 9 at far lower speeds
on a 10% grade,

Wayne

I've noticed the hill issue, my brother lives about 14 miles from my
home, 12 miles of it are almost dead flat.
the last 2 miles involves a climb up a 800 ft elevation. I've always
sworn I burned more gas going up that
grade than the whole rest of the trip ;~)

 

[Balanced View]

I haven't looked at them, but if they're lower then they're probably
even more worthless. In my experience, the EPA numbers for nearly every
vehicle claim that the MPG with an automatic transmission is better than
with a manual transmission, however on every vehicle I've owned I've had
a manual transmission and consistently achieved a better MPG than the
EPA estimates for an automatic. My current vehicle doesn't have an EPA
estimate, so I don't have a comparison there.

Really? Most of the time I looked at the EPA figures the stick is listed
as getting better mileage, at least
for the vehicles I looked up.

Not all vehicles report data on fuel consumption, my '97 K3500 doesn't
for example. The best way to track mileage is to get a receipt every
time you get gas, write the current odometer mileage on the receipt and
collect them so they can be entered into a spreadsheet to compute MPG.
It would be interesting if you saved those receipts and compared those
results with what the scan gadget tells you.

It's my understanding it's quite accurate, it uses the onboard computer
and measure flow through the injectors

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Pete C.:

If the current vehicle actually has to be replaced anyway, the math is
different, but if you're trading in a paid for and functional vehicle to
get a higher MPG, you are most often increasing your total costs, not
lowering them.

Possibly made more extreme by the plummeting resale values on
serious gas guzzlers. I think Edmonds values my '98 'burb at
something like $3,500.

 

[Vaughn Simon]

The reliable measure is the pump receipt with the odometer
reading written on it.

Which is why you use the pump receipt to calibrate that gadget. I had an
auto computer years ago that used a dedicated flow senser in in gas line. Even
then, it still needed to be calibrated.

Vaughn

 

[[email protected]]

I haven't looked at them, but if they're lower then they're probably
even more worthless. In my experience, the EPA numbers for nearly every
vehicle claim that the MPG with an automatic transmission is better than
with a manual transmission, however on every vehicle I've owned I've had
a manual transmission and consistently achieved a better MPG than the
EPA estimates for an automatic. My current vehicle doesn't have an EPA
estimate, so I don't have a comparison there.

Modern autos lockup early and shift at the most optimum time. Some
even limit the injectors between shifts to maintain the smoothest
power delivery. Haven't you ever driven with somebody in traffic who
stays in the wrong gear? I'm assuming that the newest EPA standards
take all that and more into account. There are bound to anomalies, but
none of those will change the apples-to-apples value of the ratings.

Not all vehicles report data on fuel consumption, my '97 K3500 doesn't
for example.

Compatibility list here
http://scangauge.com/support/CompatibleVehicles.shtml. Only a few
exclusions. Unless yours is a diesel, it appears that a Scangauge
would work normally.

The best way to track mileage is to get a receipt every
time you get gas, write the current odometer mileage on the receipt and
collect them so they can be entered into a spreadsheet to compute MPG.

Few are going to go to that much trouble. Besides, the method wouldn't
be very accurate for anyone who occasionally adds fuel from a gas can
as I do. I really like having the ability to see current trip mileage,
as opposed to just tank mileage or lifetime mileage. Makes it easy to
know when and why consumption changed. I also like that the next time
somebody is telling me about their veeeeery hard-to-believe mileage,
we're going for a drive with the Scangauge hooked to their vehicle.

It would be interesting if you saved those receipts and compared those
results with what the scan gadget tells you.

Even easier - when you fill up, but before you reset the instrument,
it displays what it thinks you need to add. If that number isn't
dead-on, then it can be adjusted in seconds to add a fudge factor. On
mine it was 2%.

The best thing you can do for MPG, as well as overall safety, is to
learn to look ahead and anticipate. Coasting down as you approach the
red light vs. flooring it up to it and then slamming on the brakes as an
example. The so called jack rabbit start isn't really as big a deal as
many tout, since to get to cruising speed takes X amount of energy
whether you apply it slowly or quickly.

Well, is it your opinion that it's not "really" as big a deal, or no
difference all? What percentage of jack-rabbit types nail the speed
they're aiming for without overshooting? How many jack rabbit starts
result in unnecessary braking? How many result in staying longer in a
lower gear?

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

I've noticed the hill issue, my brother lives about 14 miles from my
home, 12 miles of it are almost dead flat.
the last 2 miles involves a climb up a 800 ft elevation. I've always
sworn I burned more gas going up that
grade than the whole rest of the trip ;~)

Another anecdote - in the 13 years I've lived on a mountain (700'
climb during the last mile), I've hosed down about a half-dozen
visitors' radiators. It seems the climb will discover any marginal
cooling system, and demonstrate which visitors haven't been working
their vehicles as hard as they previously believed.

Wayne

 

[Steve Ackman]

The best way to track mileage is to get a receipt every
time you get gas, write the current odometer mileage on the receipt and
collect them so they can be entered into a spreadsheet to compute MPG.

Spreadsheet!

I have a little book in the glove compartment. Write
down the date, odometer, gallons, price. Then I pull
out the slide rule, and use that to fill in the final
column, MPG.