Gas Prices -- What would it take to get you out of your SUV?

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SparkyJJO

Lifer
May 16, 2002
13,357
7
81
I use my SUV as an SUV, I lug stuff around that I couldn't before I got it. Makes life easier in that way. In fact I'm going to be hauling stuff over the next couple of days. Also was much nicer having the ground clearance and 4x4 this past winter vs my old car. Though I DO miss my car as it was much more fun to drive in nice weather than this thing is. And yeah it was better on gas, the Camaro would get 32 open highway while my Trailblazer does 21, maybe 22. Oh well.

For all the SUV haters out there, well, shaddup. It does the job I need it to, that a stupid little econobox can not do, so can it
 

billdotson

Junior Member
Mar 29, 2011
17
0
0
It would take a few years of increased gas prices to offset the cost of a new, more fuel efficient car. Most people can't afford a new car that costs them over $10000 if it is only going to save them $1000 a year in gas.
 

Apple Of Sodom

Golden Member
Oct 7, 2007
1,808
0
0
Why bash SUVs? My wife has a GL350 BlueTech. It is a full size SUV and gets 20+ MPG, more on the highway. It is a clean burning diesel. Sometimes she drives alone, but she also picks up kids, hauls shit around, tows a boat... She uses it fully.

I have a GLK350. It gets 17 MPG and is sporty. It is pretty small, but it is an SUV nonetheless. I use it for all sorts of SUV type things. Plus I like it and how it handles on the icy roads.

Then I have an AMG C 63. No, it isn't an SUV. It is a sedan. 4 doors. It MAYBE gets 12 MPG because of the giant engine and tune (putting out over 600 HP when the headers go on!)

This SUV bashing is stupid especially since I have a car that gets shitty mileage that no one speaks up about. Bash my car over my SUVs. Bash the challengers, chargers, camaros and mustangs. Sure, those cars might say they get 20 MPG, but when you have a performance vehicle you tend to drive it like it is stolen and don't get the full MPG.

People who can afford SUVs can also generally afford more expensive gas. My wife drives an $85K vehicle...do you REALLY think that spending $300/month in gas vs. $150/month makes THAT big of a difference to me, especially when you consider how much she actually uses it?
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
Minivans get terrible gas mileage. The modern minivan weighs 5000lb and has 300hp.
As I said "Reality is that most people who have an SUV would find better utility (larger) from a minivan and it's better on gas.". Although you were being hyperbolic, the average minivan is still way under 4000 lbs.
It would take a few years of increased gas prices to offset the cost of a new, more fuel efficient car. Most people can't afford a new car that costs them over $10000 if it is only going to save them $1000 a year in gas.
This argument is valid IF moving from an older, paid-off vehicle to a new one. If, instead, a person buys a Prius instead of, say, a Camry or Vibe (direct competitors), with gas where it is now savings are immediate and substantial; it has a lower total cost of ownership by quite a large margin. Prius would save about $1k/year and is certainly not $1k/year more expensive in payments, depreciation, etc.

The days of hybrids being techy gadgets for those interested in them for technology's sake are gone. This is still the case with the Chevy Volt and some other hybrids, but at least a couple (Prius, Insight) can hold their own in a simple cost argument.
This SUV bashing is stupid especially since I have a car that gets shitty mileage that no one speaks up about. Bash my car over my SUVs.
So few people have cars that get that kind of mileage that it's almost irrelevant and you know that.
People who can afford SUVs can also generally afford more expensive gas. My wife drives an $85K vehicle...do you REALLY think that spending $300/month in gas vs. $150/month makes THAT big of a difference to me, especially when you consider how much she actually uses it?
So few people have SUVs that cost $85k that it's almost irrelevant and you know that
 

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
The days of hybrids being techy gadgets for those interested in them for technology's sake are gone. This is still the case with the Chevy Volt and some other hybrids, but at least a couple (Prius, Insight) can hold their own in a simple cost argument.

Not yet. A prius is closer to the size of a corolla than it is to a camry, and the performance of a prius is actually worse than a corolla. I've done the prius vs corolla comparison a few times and at $4/gallon it worked out to something like 150,000 miles driven to recover the added cost of the hybrid system. The insight vs civic is similar because the insight is a base model civic; it's so bare bones that it only includes 2 speakers and there are no floor mats, but it has the same price tag as the premium model civic.


As per usual, new car is almost always more expensive than old car. Driving a chevy suburban that you already have is cheaper than buying a new Toyota Yaris (rated as one of the lowest cost of ownership cars).
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
Not yet. A prius is closer to the size of a corolla than it is to a camry, and the performance of a prius is actually worse than a corolla. I've done the prius vs corolla comparison a few times and at $4/gallon it worked out to something like 150,000 miles driven to recover the added cost of the hybrid system. The insight vs civic is similar because the insight is a base model civic; it's so bare bones that it only includes 2 speakers and there are no floor mats, but it has the same price tag as the premium model civic.


As per usual, new car is almost always more expensive than old car. Driving a chevy suburban that you already have is cheaper than buying a new Toyota Yaris (rated as one of the lowest cost of ownership cars).
Let's make sure we're clear that a Prius is a mid-size. It also has more cargo capacity than the camry or corolla and in its base configuration is better equipped than either of them, so it's not fair to compare it to a Corolla. It does have smaller passenger room than a Camry, though. Yes, it's slower than a corolla, but performance is of little relevance to an appliance-car (which the Prius, Camry, Corolla all are).
 

billdotson

Junior Member
Mar 29, 2011
17
0
0
Cars for most people are simply to get to their job, run errands, etc. Most people don't need to care about the top speed or max acceleration of a car. What most people do care about is whether it can do what they need it to (enough space), get good gas mileage, etc.

If a hybrid costs $10000 more than another car but only gets 10 mpg better then the increased gas mileage isn't significant enough to make them change. If they need to get a new car and the cars available have better gas mileage then yeah, they might choose one, but anybody who is thinking about money isn't going to get rid of a working car to get one with better gas mileage.
 
Last edited:

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
Let's make sure we're clear that a Prius is a mid-size. It also has more cargo capacity than the camry or corolla and in its base configuration is better equipped than either of them, so it's not fair to compare it to a Corolla. It does have smaller passenger room than a Camry, though. Yes, it's slower than a corolla, but performance is of little relevance to an appliance-car (which the Prius, Camry, Corolla all are).
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=31363305&highlight=prius#post31363305

I still have time to kill at work so I'll calculate this one again using current US gas prices.

Corolla LE (the nicest one with 1.8L engine):
30mpg combined average
cost to drive off lot = $18,060 (used zip code 60638)

Prius Two seems to be equivalent. It's a bit slower, passenger space is about the same, cargo space is a bit more because it's a hatch.
50mpg combined average
cost to drive off lot = $23,810 (zip code 60638)

The cost of ownership, not including repairs, is represented by two straight lines. The hybrid becomes cheaper when the lines intersect.
Current gas price in chicago is $3.74 per gallon.
18060 + (3.74 $/gallon)(1 gallon / 30 miles)(X miles) = 23810 + (3.74 $/gallon)(1 gallon / 50 miles)(X miles)
18060 + (0.124666 X) = 23810 + (0.0748 X)
0.0498 X = 5750
X = 115,461 miles is the break even point


I wonder if people ever think it's a good idea to lease a Prius. It'll take most people a minimum of 5 years to put that many miles on a car, so leasing a Prius for 5 years or less would be silly because it costs more than Corolla yet the performance is worse in every measurable way! :awe:
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
If a hybrid costs $10000 more than another car but only gets 10 mpg better then the increased gas mileage isn't significant enough to make them change.
In the case of the Prius and Insight they cost a few K more and get 20 mpg better mileage.

I still think a Prius should not be compared to a Corolla, as it is appreciably larger. In any case, your calculations fail to consider the higher residual of the Prius; they are oblivious to depreciation (Prius has higher residual percentage over time). A lease is the best way to look at this situation because it comes closest to "paying as you go" and you'll find that a Leased Prius is, from day one, no more expensive than a Corolla (and yet is a mid-size) and is cheaper--immediately--than a Camry. Capitalized cost + gas is key.
 

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
In the case of the Prius and Insight they cost a few K more and get 20 mpg better mileage.

I still think a Prius should not be compared to a Corolla, as it is appreciably larger.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=29925607&highlight=prius+camry#post29925607
This is completely wrong. According to Toyota, the Corolla can handle 1025lbs of weight inside the car (GVWR minus curb weight), and the towing capacity is 1500lbs.
The Prius can handle only 938lbs inside the car (GVWR minus curb weight), and the towing capacity isn't even listed. I think that means you're not supposed to tow ANYTHING with a Prius. The transmission and frame just can't take it.



Corolla EPA passenger volume: 92 cubic feet
Prius EPA passenger volume: 93.7 cubic feet
Camry EPA passenger volume: 101.4 cubic feet

So according to Toyota's own numbers, the Prius is roughly 1.8% larger than the Corolla. OH SHIT, I CANT FIT MY FAMILY IN A CAR THAT IS 2% SMALLER!!
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
We have a an awful lot of Prius's here where I live. Talk of 50 mpg is BS according to the owners. I suspect it's because of our up and down driving (I live in the mountains).

OTOH, those with Corolla's swear by their gas mileage.

As to the OP's question, how high do gas prices need to go before people dump their SUVs? I'd say pretty damn high. If the high prices we've already haven't done it already, I'm not sure what will do it. I think people are becoming acclimated to high prices.

Fern
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
Edmunds has higher numbers than that. The Prius has a 0 lb tow capacity. I'd be surprised if even 1% of Corollas ever tow anything, though.
We have a an awful lot of Prius's here where I live. Talk of 50 mpg is BS according to the owners.
Not the owners on the Prius forums. Some do get lower and some get higher, just as owners of your car get higher or lower than EPA.
 

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,237
2
0
Ah, but we're all safer if we totally ban SUVs from the roads. Personally I question the legality of driving a vehicle that you intentionally purchased to cause more harm to anyone you get in an accident with just so YOU'RE safer. Cars are safer in EVERY circumstance except an accident with a much larger vehicle. The safest solution would seem to be banning SUVs, not EVERYONE having them. And it's not just rolling that makes SUVs unsafe, they are harder to control which means you're more likely to get in an accident in the first place. Not that I'm in favor of actually banning them, but your argument is silly.

Edit: Which reminds me, I was talking with a friend the other day, and he proposed what I thought was a novel solution to the SUV "safety" issue. They can be excellent protection if other people hit you, but make you more dangerous if you hit other folks. My friend's solution is that if you cause an accident while driving an SUV, you get charged with something extra, since you bought a vehicle you knew would cause more damage in that kind of situation. I kind of object to that on libertarian grounds, but it's an interesting idea, and might make the bad drivers think twice before buying a "safer" vehicle.

I read the posts in your gas guzzling necro-nef thread. I also read Rainsford's posts about how people who buy bigger vehicles like SUV's should be somehow held accountable in accidents since they must have bought those vehicles just to survive, while others get crushed to death in their tiny econoboxes in an accident. The fact is that ALL econoboxes are unsafe at high speeds in accidents, no matter what they hit.

The fact is, if anyone is driving 90mhp on the highway in an econobox, they should already know what the outcome will be in a crash if they hit a concrete barrier or another vehicle head on. They will die. Just like they will die if they are riding a motorcycle at 120mph down the freeway in traffic and they get hit. Econoboxes or small cars are not made for survivability in an 90mph accident, they are made for only minimum survivability in 60 mph accidents, which is what they are tested for.

The only way to make an econobox survivable in a 90mph accident is to add so much frame steel and sheet metal thickness to the car that it would end up getting the same gas mileage as an F150 V8 as a result, and then therefore make it unattractive to econobox buyers.

The biggest single factor in a survivable econobox accident is the speed of the driver of the econobox, not the the larger vehicles it may hit. Unless you are talking about a bus or an 18 wheeler. In which case you are pretty much guaranteed death if you hit one in any vehicle going over 90mph.

If someone chooses to drive a death trap econobox vehicle that is unsuited to safe driving over 60 mph down the highway at 90mph and has a fatal accident, that is going to be the fault of the driver for going 90mph. And also you don't save much gas going 90mph, either, as the small engine is straining to keep up with the speed and weight demands on it.

A law that all states need to adopt, and some already have, would force 18 wheelers and buses into the right lanes on a highway, and only allow the left hand lanes for vehicles like cars, vans and light trucks. Not only do laws like this save countless lives in traffic accidents with 18 wheelers on the highways, they also save countless gallons of gas when the slowly accelerating and braking 18 wheelers stick to the same right lanes as traffic gets congested and allows the faster accelerating vehicles into the left lanes to speed up traffic flows.

And I have personally seen 18 wheelers literally crush econoboxes flat onto the concrete in accidents where they ran over them at 90mph or more, and the only thing identifiable left of the carnage was the tires and the rims to even tell what kind of econobox it was that was crushed completely. Of course the occupants were reduced to a few red globs and ooze all over the highway, and were mostly not even able to be recovered or identifiable as remains. All the fire department can do at that point is squeegee the few chunky bits up and hose the liquified remains off the highway. And these types of fatal vehicle crushing accidents involving 18 wheelers and econoboxes are a lot more common than you might think.

Which makes me shudder at the thought of the feds again debating allowing unsafe Mexican 18 wheelers and inadequately trained drivers from Mexico who don't speak or read English on our highways and streets. I'm sure the fatality and accident rates for 18 wheelers will double or triple or worse if they ever stupidly allow that to happen.
 

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,237
2
0
And getting back on topic a bit...

There are more small sized SUVs on the road than ever before. And their gas mileage is almost the same as many econoboxes. You can get them with 4 cylinders, too. And while they may not be as speedy as the econoboxes with the same engine displacements, they get gas mileages nearly equal to them on the highway.

And there are plenty of reasons to have one, not the least of which is a higher profile that will be added protection in a traffic accident. So if you think rolling over in an econobox is Ok, remember you are already pressed into one like a sardine to start with. If you roll over in an SUV, even a small one, at least your body has room to move around as the vehicle becomes crushed around you. This is partly because the seating is higher in an SUV than in an econobox, too. Which also makes it easier to get in and out of for older and disabled people.

And if you regularly carry multiple passengers in your SUV, plus groceries, shopping bags or whatever, by comparison, an econobox is not only impractical, but extremely uncomfortable as people are smashed into it in the back seats as well.
 
Last edited:

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
And getting back on topic a bit...

There are more small sized SUVs on the road than ever before. And their gas mileage is almost the same as many econoboxes. You can get them with 4 cylinders, too. And while they may not be as speedy as the econoboxes with the same engine displacements, they get gas mileages nearly equal to them on the highway.
This is incorrect.
Honda Accord 2.4L - 34mpg highway
Honda CRV 2.4L - 28mpg (21% higher fuel consumption)


And if you regularly carry multiple passengers in your SUV, plus groceries, shopping bags or whatever, by comparison, an econobox is not only impractical, but extremely uncomfortable as people are smashed into it in the back seats as well.
Honda Accord passenger volume = 106 cubic feet
Honda CRV passenger volume = 103.8

The SUV is atually SMALLER than the tin can.
 

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,237
2
0
This is incorrect.
Honda Accord 2.4L - 34mpg highway
Honda CRV 2.4L - 28mpg (21% higher fuel consumption)

Honda Accord passenger volume = 106 cubic feet
Honda CRV passenger volume = 103.8

The SUV is atually SMALLER than the tin can.

Those fuel consumption figures look real nice on paper. But they don't take into account a lot of factors that effect fuel consumption a lot more, such as automatic or standard, what option packages are on the vehicle, what elevation are you operating the vehicle at, what type of gas are you using, the list goes on and on. The fact is people have been griping about fudged numbers on gas mileage "ratings" on vehicles as long as they have been required by the feds.

Nevertheless, you will probably get a better than that mileage rating for gas mileage on your SUV, and a worse than that rating on the car in this comparison. The only differing factor if the engines and transmissions are the same, is a bit more air flow drag on the SUV and a bit more weight. And that is offset by the fact you will accelerate a bit more slowly in the suv, and a lot faster in the car. So in effect virtually negating the difference on paper in gas savings between the 2 almost completely.

And as far as passenger space, I'm not going to argue with you about it. Get in both of them, and then tell me how accurate that is. Part of that "passenger volume" figure is false. The seats in an SUV are obviously larger and thicker and sit up higher off the floor than they do in a car. The TOTAL volume of the INTERIOR space for passengers (NOT PASSENGER VOLUME) is LARGER in an small SUV versus a car in a similar class size. That's not rocket science, you can see it for yourself when you are inside it.

That "passenger volume" figure is completely suspect on ALL vehicles and all you have to do is compare 2 vehicles where the figures don't add up because when you are inside them you see they appear just the opposite. Compare the CRV with the Ford Escape. According to the numbers, the Escape has only 99 cubic feet of passenger space, but the CRV claims its has 103.8. I have been in both, and the Escape seems to have more room than the CRV, at least in the front seat area. So which is wrong, or rather, which is more accurate?

You also are not sandwiched with your legs shoved all the way up into the engine compartment in a typical SUV. A potential design flaw that in a car, in an accident, will cause you a great deal of suffering and pain when your legs are injured or severed from your body or you can't get out of the car because you are pinned into it by your legs.

Once you cut out and extract a few accident victims who are pinned into their cars by their legs, you quickly understand how dangerous it is to straddle the engine compartment with your legs.
 

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
Those fuel consumption figures look real nice on paper. But they don't take into account a lot of factors that effect fuel consumption a lot more, such as automatic or standard
According to the EPA, manual vs standard usually makes no difference. link to EPA
Honda Accord automatic - 34mpg highway
Honda Accord manual - 33mpg highway


The fact is people have been griping about fudged numbers on gas mileage "ratings" on vehicles as long as they have been required by the feds.
I've posted this several times before, but this is a picture of the fuel consumption gauge on my Toyota Corolla: picture. It works out to roughly 32 miles per US gallon, and that's all city mileage. I have not driven a car that gets less than the estimates unless the car had problems like a spark plug that isn't firing or a clogged fuel injector.


And that is offset by the fact you will accelerate a bit more slowly in the suv, and a lot faster in the car. So in effect virtually negating the difference on paper in gas savings between the 2 almost completely.
???
I hammer it off the line every time and I'm still beating the EPA estimates by about 20%. If you've followed my stories in AT Garage, you'll know that my automatic transmission had to be replaced under warranty because I was "abusing" it (their opinion, not mine). Your car will only be under the EPA's numbers if you're in ridiculously dense traffic or if the car has significant mechanical problems.


SUVs are definitely comfortable, but there's always a cost somewhere. Gas is one of them.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
Before you purchase an SUV you should know more about what it takes to flip one over. Better know the roll over test data!
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
3
0
The problem with the EPA is they don't hypermile. With a manual you can squeeze more MPGs out of a car than you could with an auto. ShawnD1 you were complaining about your Corolla downshifting. Well with a manual you can choose to short shift, which sometimes helps mileage. There's also less drivetrain loss with a manual because the auto is turning the transmission indirectly with the slushy torque convertor, until you reach cruising speed and it locks up.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |