Talk Back Tuesday: How much car do you really need?

Last Friday's blog about the GMC Acadia versus Yukon Denali raised some interesting discussion points. The two dominant arguments were either:
1. The Yukon Denali is overpriced and unnecessary when the same division offers the Acadia; or
2. The Yukon Denali has more capability than the Acadia in areas like towing and hauling, and is thus worth the money
As is often the case, both of these arguments are correct, depending on your needs as a buyer. But this brings up the next big question: How much car (or truck, or SUV, etc.) do you really need? The emphasis on "really" comes from a phenomenon I think we're all aware of -- perceived versus actual vehicle needs. As such, I present the following two-step process to consider when buying your next vehicle:
1. Think in terms of common versus extraordinary circumstances. Do you have a family of four and only very occasionally (twice a year?) carry more than five people in your car? Do you tow things (boat, camper, another car, etc.) less than twice a year? Do these two events often coincide (i.e. your relatives come to visit and you all go camping or boating)?
How about inclement road conditions? How often does the snow level in your community preclude travel in anything without all-wheel drive or four wheel drive? I grew up in Denver driving rear-wheel drive muscle cars with all-season tires. How often did the weather keep me from driving around the city? Less than once a year (and usually the whole city was shut down on those days, so there was little need to go anywhere).
2. Think in terms of "rent" versus "own." If you rarely carry more than five passengers, and/or rarely tow anything, and/or rarely drive in weather that would slow a front-wheel drive sedan with all-season tires, then you really don't need more than a mid-priced, four-door sedan 95 percent of the time. BTW, for the purposes of this discussion I'll define "rarely" as four times a year or less. If you need more cargo space than a sedan offers a sedan-based wagon would likely handle the occasional bicycles/sports equipment/girl scout cookies that don't fit in a standard trunk.
This theoretical sedan or wagon would work for you the overwhelming majority of the time, allowing you to rent an appropriate vehicle for that other 5 percent you spend vacationing with the relatives in a camper or towing your old muscle car across the country. And the money saved in terms of purchase price, insurance rates and fuel costs on the sedan or wagon versus a larger vehicle would easily pay for SUV/Minivan/Crossover rental on these rare occasions.
Now, before all the "Hey! Don't try to limit what I buy Karl! Why don't you go back to Russia?!" reactions begin, let me make something clear -- I don't advocate the idea of restricting what people can buy. I'm even kooky enough to think one of the (many) great things about America is the ability to have more than you need, and the people who don't feel that way really should go to Russia -- actually China since they are still a communist government. These are the same poeple who think we can "regulate" ourselves to economic stability. Little hint people: In the race to sustained prosperity, freedom of choice will beat government restriction every time, and that goes for vehicle design and purchase behavior, too.
Thus my point isn't that people shouldn't be allowed to buy whatever vehicle they want. My point is that you should be honest about your lifestyle and fully recognize when you really need a large, utilitarian vehicle and when you simply want one.
For example, do I need a Ford GT? Nobody needs a Ford GT! However, I'm fully ready to admit I simply wanted one, functionality and earth-saving desires be damned. I'm not sure how many SUV drivers really need one, but I fear many of these folks aren't ready to admit they simply want one.
And at this point I have to add what really kills me is when these same folks, sitting in the cabin of their 6,000-pound SUVs/Crossovers/full-size trucks that they don't really need, claim to be earth conscious and/or scream "No blood for oil!" or "We need to stop being held hostage by our energy policies that subjugate us to Middle East countries."
Whatever folks.
Posted by Karl Feb 26, 2008 7:00 am
Permalink
Categories: GMC | Talk Back Tuesday
|
|
Cruiserhead,
Thanks for reminding me about diesels. Hopefully there will be at least a modest resurgence in diesels with the new 50-state emission systems they've come up with. A diesel Jetta wagon might be what Carol30 is looking for.
I haven't tried a Jetta wagon in a while, but the last time I rode in one (back in 2005) both the shotgun seat and the rear seat seemed too cramped for me to be comfortable (I'm 6'1" and have a little extra poundage). My 2003 Honda Civic sedan, in contrast, has plenty of room (except for rear seat headroom) and works fine for extended trips.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
How many people participate is a vehicle mass arms race? I don't feel safe driving less than a 3000 lb. car on highways full of light trucks. My current car is a 3200 lb. Honda Accord, but my next vehicle will probably be a 3500 lb. "uparmored" near-luxury sedan with side impact air bags. I tend to oppose additional government regulation, but I would consider putting a maximum weight limit on the vehicle one can drive with a regular Class C drivers license.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
Hmmm, I've had my SRT-4 since I bought it almost exactly five years ago new. I've had passengers in the back seat less than five times, so by this logic I could have definitely pulled off the S2000 I had my eye on instead.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
I bought a new impala 2 years ago, and haven't used the air conditioner more than 20 times. Does this mean I over bought?
|
|
 |  |
|
|
L.A. CA United States of America |
|
|
No, it means you under aircondition.
I hardly need it in L.A., too, but I turn it on at least once on month on my cars to keep the compressor from seizing up.
|
|
 |  |
drwales
- Feb 27, 2008 7:43 am
(#37 Total: 51)
|
|
|
|
Orangutan (and others lamenting the demise of the Mazda 6 and Subaru Legacy wagons): no love for the pre-owned.
It's not that much more of a stretch (figuratively or financially) to move to a CPO lease-end wagon from one the BIg 3 German Marques...
Just a thought.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
"I tend to oppose additional government regulation, but I would consider putting a maximum weight limit on the vehicle one can drive with a regular Class C drivers license."
Already done. Although the limit is a little scary. It's 26,000 pounds (at least in PA.)
|
|
 |  |
joberg
- Feb 27, 2008 8:16 am
(#39 Total: 51)
|
|
|
|
I was looking for a mention here about the the Legacy wagon. Seeing none, I poked over the the Edmunds Legacy page, and what, No Wagon?! Just a few years ago, Subaru offered a Legacy Wagon, GT with a stick, rated at 19/25. Practical, AWD, somewhat economical, and fun. With its death, seems as though we are going the wrong way in terms of choices.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
George, I drive a 2600 lbs car and feel perfectly safe on the road. Not sure why people are constantly worried about the possibility of getting hit. Do you not scuba dive because the regulator may break? Do you avoid sky diving because the chute may not open? Forget about eating beef...it may have e. coli. Chicken's got the old salmonella too. Avoid the tuna, there could be mercury. When do people stop worrying about safety and start just enjoying life?
|
|
 |  |
|
|
L.A. CA United States of America |
|
|
When the government tells us to.
Sorry, it was too easy to pass up.
|
|
 |  |
jaserb
- Feb 27, 2008 2:20 pm
(#42 Total: 51)
|
|
|
|
UT United States of America |
|
|
I'd like to see you try to tow something with a rented SUV. Every rental I've had has a "no-tow" clause in the contract, assuming you can even find a rental with a trailer hitch.
-Jason
|
|
 |  |
|
|
Smart smart smart.
I firmly believe that most people don't need anything more than a simple sedan, and a credit card to rent a truck/suv/sports car on a once-in-a-while basis.
Having said that, how great is it to live in a country where you can buy whatever you want, regardless of how impractical it might be?
God bless America, that's what I say.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
"I firmly believe that most people don't need anything more than a simple sedan, and a credit card to rent a truck/suv/sports car on a once-in-a-while basis. "
On this topic, I had a colourful discusion today with a co-worker who says you don't need a car at all. He bikes when possible and takes transit or cabs the rest of the time, has never owned a car at all. Once or twice a year he'll rent a car when nothing else will do.
Not the life for me but his points were all valid. Taking the idea of not having more then you need would mean that a lot of people should not have a car at all.
Anyone who thinks people should not be allowed to have SUV's should talk to my friend and see if they are able to justify whatever it is that they drive.
I convinced him that I needed one car but couldn't justify having the 2nd one. ( I'm keeping it anyhow, it's a free country so far)
|
|
 |  |
|
|
"George, I drive a 2600 lbs car and feel perfectly safe on the road. Not sure why people are constantly worried about the possibility of getting hit. Do you not scuba dive because the regulator may break? Do you avoid sky diving because the chute may not open? Forget about eating beef...it may have e. coli. Chicken's got the old salmonella too. Avoid the tuna, there could be mercury. When do people stop worrying about safety and start just enjoying life?"
+1
"I'd like to see you try to tow something with a rented SUV. Every rental I've had has a "no-tow" clause in the contract, assuming you can even find a rental with a trailer hitch."
That is a good point. Does anyone have additional insight into this issue?
|
|
 |  |
|
|
Nearly 90% of the time we drive alone. On average, we use a 4,000 pound vehicle to haul a 200 pound load. I'm sorry, but that's crazy. Europeans drive smaller cars and yet have full functionality. Their fleet average fuel economy is nearly twice as high as ours and their accident death rate per mile is 1/3 lower than ours.
We purchase a vehicle based on its ultimate use, and then use it very lightly loaded. As economists would say, our marginal rate of return on the increased investment is extremely low.
Many people buying an SUV are not making a rational decision. My permanent home is northern Minnesota. I bet my old minivan has been on worse roads, off road, and in worse snow conditions than 90% of SUVs will ever see, yet I've never gotten stuck, even when I've plowed through snow as high as my front bumper.
Eighty percent of our road miles we put on our 10 year old stick-shift Neon, which gets 30 mpg in town and over 40 on the highway. The other 20% we put on our minivan, which is used as a pickup truck much of the time. It gets 24 mpg and will haul more stuff than any SUV.
I see a vehicle resembling the Tata Nano as the model for our increasingly oil short future. Light, small, efficient and low cost, two such 10' long vehicles could fit into one side of a suburban garage and provide mom and dad with their commuting needs. Two of these cars would cost as much as one compact sedan. On the other side of the garage would reside a multipurpose vehicle, which would not be a daily commuter, but would be used for those times you need to carry more people or stuff.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
The USA is not Europe. Here, in America, our cities are expansive and driving is a totally different experience.
Europe does not have 18-wheelers, nor the same type of urban planning- not even close.
People do things out of necessity. Europeans need small cars to navigate extremely compacted urban landscapes and narrow roads that are thousands of years old. They have a completely different lifestyle.
The USA is a little over 500 years old and the closest you will get to cramped urban quarters are a few cities on the east coast.
Sure there are limited markets for cars like the SMART or Nano but look at them-
the SMART (2 person vehicle) is the same price as the Honda FIT, yet doesn't get better mpgs, is not safer, does not carry as much and no better emission standard and cannot perform as well. Less cargo, less room, less control...same or more msrp...hmm.
It's just as extreme as a soccer mom suv in the opposite end of the spectrum.
Good and bad, lifestyles can be modified but it takes time and needs widespread acceptance to make a difference. I believe diesels are a huge step in the right direction.
|
|
 |  |
myob
- Mar 2, 2008 5:53 pm
(#48 Total: 51)
|
|
|
|
Speaking of how much do you really need, one trend I've seen in recent years, especially on domestic SUV's and trucks, is the incredible price range of a particular vehicle due to an amazing variety of options that are piled on. Many of these options are things I couldn't even dream up on my own.
While AWD and leather are pretty obvious, many others can take a $28,000 base vehicle with the same size, driveline, and capability, and turn it into a $40,000 retirement fund draining mistake.
Yet reading forums on the web, I'm amazed at just how many buyers mention they'll be getting it "loaded with every option" and consider things like factory nav "must have". That would be fine, but these are also buyers who mention things like "I can afford $500/mo" in the same posts.
What? You can't afford to pay cash yet you have to have heated seats and dual rear DVD players, upgraded stereo, memory seats, etc?
No wonder the savings rate in the US is about negative 1%.
Yet ironically I will hear the same posters complain fiercely about a 2-3 mpg difference in vehicles, as if the extra couple hundred bucks a year for gas is a problem.
Give it about a year's time, and this will all be a moot point, as the days of "EZ credit" that is cheap will be gone and people will think twice about loading them up like a baked potato. "payment buyers" will want things like actual performance and quality in lieu of frills.
The $5500 of options my wife insisted on on a Saab brought about $500 more in resale value 5 years later (according to Edmunds). Other than the sport pkg and wheels I could not have cared less about any of them. But at least we paid the vehicle off 2 years into a 5 year loan. If I was broke I'd sure be regretting those options like heated seats and "infotainment", whatever that is.
|
|
 |  |
estreka
- Mar 2, 2008 7:42 pm
(#49 Total: 51)
|
|
|
|
subarctic north - Great Falls, MT |
|
|
Myob - I completely agree. In fact, I bet since 7.1 million (and counting) former homeowners have cashed out their nest egg, vehicles will be next on the list. I forsee massive waves of vehicle defaults in the near future.
|
|
 |  |
|
|
Karl is 100% correct. I was made fun of and harassed when I bought my 1997 Miata.
"Its so small, how are you supposed to go shopping or drive home from school" etc....
I have lived with this thing for 2 years now and its size is an advantage. I can park anywhere, get reasonable fuel economy, and its small size and agile handling have saved my ass loads of times.
The vehicle I drove before it was a 96 Rav4. Sometimes I miss the practicality but its never actually a problem. I can always rent or borrow a car with more space when I need it.
|
|
 |  |
estreka
- Mar 7, 2008 9:11 pm
(#51 Total: 51)
|
|
|
|
subarctic north - Great Falls, MT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Edmunds Consumer Comparison Test: Economy Cars May 15, 2008
- 2009 Acura TSX: A Really-Really-Really Good Honda May 14, 2008
- Talk Back Tuesday: Chrysler refools-ur, refuels America May 13, 2008
- Ford's SYNC: A Look at the Future in a Car from the Past May 12, 2008
- April's Automotive Sales Numbers: Not a Pretty Picture May 9, 2008
- MPG Smackdown: Focus vs Jetta vs Prius vs Smart May 8, 2008
- Cars that Jumped the Shark: Mazda Miata May 7, 2008
- Talk Back Tuesday: Will Plug-In Hybrids Really Work? May 6, 2008
- Legend of the Motorcycle: Pebble Beach without Posers May 5, 2008
- Top 10 Fuel Efficient SUVs for 2008: CAFE Can't Kill 'Em May 2, 2008
|
|
|
|