|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 91 responses total. |
keesan
|
|
response 20 of 91:
| 
Oct 13 13:22 UTC 2006 |
How many miles would you drive this replacement vehicle while you owned it?
Any car with a trunk would have room for a stroller and groceries, and also
for at least two baby seats in back. But maybe you want more personal space
if you are a tall/wide person. Are there cars which have a larger interior
but still get better mileage than a van? Jim fits into a small car only if
he leans the seat back to make headroom (he has to sit at an angle).
Why do you change diapers in a car rather than a restroom?
|
ball
|
|
response 21 of 91:
|
Oct 13 19:13 UTC 2006 |
Wild guess: 100,000 miles or further provided the vehicle
holds up. Our strollers are larger than usual (stooping and
pushing don't go well together) and we usually have a *lot*
of groceries. We could buy a little less if we ate less and
presumably if we had a garden in which to grow vegetables.
With a stroller in the back of the Matrix, I could get
perhaps three grocery bags in there.
We change the baby in the car sometimes because it's more
convenient than arriving somewhere, trying to locate the
bathroom, and hoping that there is a changing table or
having to figure out what to do with things we're carrying
while we're busy with the baby (wait until we're at the car
and the things are stowed, more arms are free). Some bath-
rooms are so unsanitary that *I* don't want to go in them,
let alone take a baby in there.
Perhaps a Camry station wagon, if such a thing exists.
|
keesan
|
|
response 22 of 91:
|
Oct 13 20:24 UTC 2006 |
Assuming gasoline averages $3/gallon over the life of your vehicle (no
inflation), with a minivan getting 20 mpg and a car getting 40 mpg, 100,000
miles would be 5000 or 2,500 gallons, a difference of 2,500 gallons at
$3/gallon (which is probably a low estimate) or $7,500 extra to drive the
minivan. Someone please correct my arithmetic or assumptions. You could
buy a lot of groceries for that amount (and more if the price of gas goes
up over the next ten years). If you drove it 10 years, $750/year, about
$60/month. If you change babies in the car for three years, that would be
$2500/year for a portable baby-changing table with wheels. $200/month.
It would also produce double the pollution, if you care about that.
Our local supermarket will pick out and deliver groceries for $15, which
would let you have your groceries delivered once a week for what you would
save in gas. If gasoline averages $6 of course it is double the
difference ($15,000 extra over the 100,000 miles). Is there a difference
in insurance rates or purchase costs on minivans vs small cars?
|
ball
|
|
response 23 of 91:
|
Oct 13 22:23 UTC 2006 |
I won't buy any vehicle that only gets 20 MPG. Most cars
(petrol/gasoline ones) won't get 40 MPG. I think a van is
likely to suffer lower economy than a car (even a station
wagon) because of increased weight and drag, so even if the
numbers are wrong, the concept is probably valid. National
Geographic thinks the price of oil (and petrol) is likely to
increase consistently over the next ten years, which sounds
quite likely.
I do care about pollution. It's a shame that I can't buy a
fuel cell car today. It's also unfortunate that a family of
three living in the Mid West require two cars. My sister has
a husband, three children and they have no car because they
live in Britain and the few things that aren't in walking
distance can be reached easily via inexpensive public
transport.
My wife has to choose her own groceries. You'd have to ask
her about that. Insurance may actually be less expensive for
a van than a car because they're larger and the perception
seems to be that the passengers are less vulnerable in the
event of a collision. Perhaps they also think 'soccer moms'
drive with more care.
|
keesan
|
|
response 24 of 91:
|
Oct 14 02:04 UTC 2006 |
For $750/year (or more) would it be worth making a few extra trips to the
grocery store? Our 1987 Dodge Colt gets about 40 mpg, and I assume newer cars
could do better. What do the best new ones get? What do the best minivans
get?
|
cyklone
|
|
response 25 of 91:
|
Oct 14 02:18 UTC 2006 |
Two mistaken assumptions:
1 Not a lot of cars suitable for a family with small children get 40 mpg
2 If space is a problem, buying a portable changing table is not likely to
improve that situation.
|
ball
|
|
response 26 of 91:
|
Oct 14 02:19 UTC 2006 |
I don't know how you wring 40 MPG out of your Dodge. What
kind of engine does it have? Perhaps you could describe how
you calculate the fuel economy.
|
ball
|
|
response 27 of 91:
|
Oct 14 02:19 UTC 2006 |
Re #25: I think that was a metaphor.
|
keesan
|
|
response 28 of 91:
|
Oct 14 03:04 UTC 2006 |
Small children should not have a lot of trouble fitting into the back seat
of a small car. We don't wring mileage, we simply kept track of the miles
and the gallons and did the calculations a few times. The 1986 Toyota was
getting closer to 50 mpg out of the city. Jim keeps the tires properly
inflated, and the spark plugs cleaned, and the engine tuned, and fluid levels
correct. And drives so as to not need the brake (he slows down before stop
lights and turns off the car at longer lights). These are manual
transmission, which if properly used is more efficient. The Toyota is 4-door.
I don't know about the engines - 4 cylinder? 150,000 miles when we got the
Dodge about 10 years ago from the original owner, who kept itmaintained.
We put on another 10,000 or so doing long trips. It is only driven once a
year.
|
ball
|
|
response 29 of 91:
|
Oct 14 04:44 UTC 2006 |
It sounds as though Jim and I have somewhat similar driving
styles. I think 50 MPG is very unusual for a conventional
car with a petrol engine. I drive my car almost every day,
but it's hard to imagine that making so vast a difference in
fuel economy. My car has a 1.9 litre engine (tuned towards
'docile') with a manual gearbox.
|
ball
|
|
response 30 of 91:
|
Oct 14 04:55 UTC 2006 |
Small children sit in huge child seats.
|
keesan
|
|
response 31 of 91:
|
Oct 14 18:03 UTC 2006 |
Car seats are, I presume, designed to fit standard size cars.
Jim says the 40-50 mpg was outside of cities, he never drove over 55 mpg, he
did not brake going down hills, he stopped using the gas before intersections
and coasted into them, etc. We don't drive in the city, just once a year on
vacation. What mpg do the best new cars get nowadays?
|
keesan
|
|
response 32 of 91:
|
Oct 14 18:09 UTC 2006 |
See http://www.fueleconomy.gov for lots of info about pollution,
efficiency, driving styles, etc. The best hybrid car of 2005 got 61 mpg city,
and the best SUV (hybrid) got 36 mpg. You need to download an entire list of
all the vehicles for 2006 to see specifics, I think (and use a javascript
browser - which maybe will let you look up specific models). How much extra
does a hybrid car cost? I bet it pays for itself in a few years.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 33 of 91:
|
Oct 14 19:32 UTC 2006 |
I think the jury is still out, because (I don't believe) a retail price
has been set yet for replacement battery packs.
|
ball
|
|
response 34 of 91:
|
Oct 15 02:29 UTC 2006 |
I understand that most non-trivial work on a hybrid has to
be done at a dealership, with expensive labour rates.
Hybrids are a red herring anyway I think, but perhaps they
will help debug technologies that will later prove useful in
electric, Hydrogen or fuel-cell cars.
I get about 32 MPG on the highway, mostly driving around 65
MPH (unless I'm running late for something).
|
ball
|
|
response 35 of 91:
|
Oct 15 02:31 UTC 2006 |
People tell me that 32 MPG is "not bad at all".
|
gull
|
|
response 36 of 91:
|
Oct 15 02:53 UTC 2006 |
Some minivans can get low- to mid-20s, which is not quite as good as a
mid-sized car but better than a full-size car. A full-size van would
put you down below 20 mpg, but it doesn't sound like you're talking
about a full-sized van anyway.
You might consider choosing a car that's a flexible-fuel vehicle (FFV),
since that would give you the option to run on E85 if it ever becomes
widely available.
For the type of vehicle you're talking about, you might consider buying
from a rental company. They sell off their cars after a year or two in
rental service. They're usually dealer-maintained and sometimes still
carry a warranty, so they can be a pretty good bet.
|
ball
|
|
response 37 of 91:
|
Oct 15 04:31 UTC 2006 |
E85 is available at just about every filling station in this
area. Biodiesel less so, although if you know where to look
you can buy it. E85 apparently decreases fuel economy,
perhaps to the point where it ofsets its lower cost. It may
be a little less harmful to the environment though, perhaps.
|
ball
|
|
response 38 of 91:
|
Oct 15 04:32 UTC 2006 |
I think I read somewhere that E85 has a much lower energy
return on energy invested (EREI) than BioDiesel too.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 39 of 91:
|
Oct 15 07:41 UTC 2006 |
Making ethanol is inherently a more expensive operation per Kcal than making
biodiesel.
It has been estimated by engineering professionals that if we converted
*every* hectare of agricultural land to corn production for ethanol in
this country, it would amount to less than 10% of our current fuel
consumption. Of course then we wouldn't need fuel as we would all starve
to death.
|
keesan
|
|
response 40 of 91:
|
Oct 15 15:10 UTC 2006 |
Getting 23 (minivan) instead of 32 (car) mpg, 100,000 miles, $3/gallon, is
a difference of about $3700 extra for the minivan. You could still buy a lot
of groceries for that. The difference between 50 (hybrid, assuming it does
less than the 61 mpg best) and 25 mpg (minivan) would be about $6000, which
should pay for a lot of repairs even by a dealer, on the hybrid car. And also
produce half as much pollution, which you claim to care about. A lot of
people claim to be anti-pollution and anti-global-warming, but don't care
enough to do anything about it personally.
Do hybrid cars have the same lifespan?
|
ball
|
|
response 41 of 91:
|
Oct 15 15:40 UTC 2006 |
I wouldn't buy a vehicle that only got 23 MPG. US$ 6,000
goes a little way at the dealership, but not as far as I
would hope (probably even less far when you own a hybrid).
Lower emissions are a Good Thing, and may be reason enough
to pay the extra for a hybrid. If anyone knows the lifespan
of a hybrid, they're not telling. As was mentioned, the
replacement cost of the battery is a concern.
|
keesan
|
|
response 42 of 91:
|
Oct 15 18:06 UTC 2006 |
What mpg would you expect a minivan to get? Battery costs are coming down
steadily and there are newer types under development. What do you expect to
go wrong with a hybrid but not with a minivan?
Do you have a place to get natural gas for cars?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 43 of 91:
|
Oct 15 18:36 UTC 2006 |
You also have to consider the energy costs and environmental conseqences
of *making* and, in the end, recycling/trashing the vehicle. This is
called Life Cycle Analysis (http://www.gdrc.org/uem/lca/life-cycle.html).
It is, unfortunately, not done for most products.
|
gull
|
|
response 44 of 91:
|
Oct 15 21:12 UTC 2006 |
Hybrids large enough to comfortably fit two car seats and some luggage
in are on the expensive side and don't get nearly the fuel economy the
small ones do. Also, think about the type of driving you'll be doing.
Hybrids don't have much, if any, fuel economy advantage in highway
driving. They're only helpful in stop-and-go, city driving. If you're
looking for a highway vehicle that gets good fuel economy, you might
consider a diesel. (But with the high cost of diesel fuel lately, that
may not be a net win over gasoline.) Hybrid reliability is also an
open question, so I don't know if I'd buy a used one. I've heard the
Honda Insight, in particular, has turned out to be a bit of a lemon.
|