4 ms·

"Ignoring identical costs (GAS/TIRES)" Well, gas consumption surely are not identical between a 10 year old and a new car. Depending on your usage buying a new

by tjoff 9y ago

"Ignoring identical costs (GAS/TIRES)" Well, gas consumption surely are not identical between a 10 year old and a new car. Depending on your usage buying a newer and more expensive car might be justifiable due to savings in gas prices (you folks in the US might not agree since gas is so cheap for you).

DocG 9y ago
Depends. Newer cars are heavier, engines tend to be smaller and have to be more environment friendlier. An older exampl of ~40mpg for Golf III Diesel combined is not bad even in todays standards.
- ensiferum 9y ago
  There are no environmentally friendly cars. Only some models are less bad for the environment than some other models. The only environmentally friendly car is the one that isn't built.
  - ams6110 9y ago
    > The only environment friendly car is the one that isn't built. That's why buying used is the environmentally best choice.
    - ensiferum 9y ago
      Buying no car is the best choice. From environmental perspective.
      - IncRnd 9y ago
        By extension, that also means that the best choice from an environmental perspective is not to have a cell phone, not to turn on the lights or A/C, not to use a computer or the Internet, and not to purchase pre-packaged food.
        ensiferum 9y ago
        Absolutely.
pille 9y ago
Could you give an example? Not saying there isn't one, but I haven't noticed a major trend of increasing fuel efficiency for a given model over the past 10 years. It looks like the difference would have to offset 2000$/year (so, what about 20-40 full tanks/yr in the EU?). Or do you mean there are just more hybrids and electrics available now than there were 10 years ago?
- adrianN 9y ago
  Average consumption of a new car in Germany has gone down ~30% in the last ten years: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/185831/umfrage/kraftstoffverbrauch-von-neuzugelassenen-pkw-in-deutschland/ https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/185831/umfrag... But it might be more interesting to look for, say, the lower 30 percentile. I have the feeling that the improvement at the lower end is not as great, but I don't have numbers to back that up.
- jameshart 9y ago
  Why look to ten year trends? That graph has the extreme case of buying ten year old cars and keeping them for five years - meaning with that strategy you are at times driving a car which is fifteen years behind the curve of fuel efficiency development. Not to mention the effect that 15 years of engine wear has on the efficiency of the specific car. To get specific: a 2017 Ford F-150 (to stick with the absurdly parochial example used here) gets 19-26mpg; a 2002 F-150 got 17-21 - that may not look like much but is a 12-25% improvement, not a completely insignificant difference. A 1987 f150 got 10-12mpg, so it's clearly a continuing trend, too.
- omegote 9y ago
  A ten year old car with 100hp using 95 octanes could make on average about 8l/100km. Currently they're about 5l to 6l on average. On 1000km that's close to 30l, with a rate of 1.20€ per litter that's 36€. On a lifespan of 150k that's 5400€.
- jdietrich 9y ago
  Given the Volkswagen affair, I'm not sure that any official efficiency figures can be trusted. Improvements in average efficiency might be genuine, or they might be the result of gamesmanship to meet CAFE requirements.
ams6110 9y ago
Tires are not equivalent either. Tires for a truck or SUV, or for a high performance car, can be 5x or more the price compared to tires for a small economy car.
linopolus 9y ago
I rather find the trend going upwards. My 2002 VW Golf 4 Variant (station wagon) consumes 5-6l/100km(47-39MPG) (Diesel), and I often drive rather fast and furious, can get it down to 4,5l (52MPG) by slowing a bit down. Try to find a current car that size and power (1,3tons empty, 100hp) consuming less (measured, not the manufacturers claims). The downwards trend is not coming from similar vehicles slurping less, but from more people buying extremely small cars, like VW Up. At least in Germany. All my humble opinion.
- trgn 9y ago
  Absolutely a factor. Fuel efficiency gains gets wasted on a lot of car models as they got larger and heavier. And it's larger and heavier cars that are the top sellers now (not just US, even in Europe cars are more bloated on the whole than 20 years ago). Government should tax cars by weight. The heavier a car is, all other things being equal, the greater it's negative externalities. Heavy vehicles cause more road wear&tear, take up more street parking space, are more dangerous to other road users if an accident occurs, reduce visibility more greatly for other road users, worse for the environment. In the large car arms race, everybody is a loser. Plus, smaller cars are just more fun to own and drive, heh!

by tjoff 9y ago

DocG 9y ago

Depends. Newer cars are heavier, engines tend to be smaller and have to be more environment friendlier. An older exampl of ~40mpg for Golf III Diesel combined is not bad even in todays standards.

ensiferum 9y ago
There are no environmentally friendly cars. Only some models are less bad for the environment than some other models. The only environmentally friendly car is the one that isn't built.
- ams6110 9y ago
  > The only environment friendly car is the one that isn't built. That's why buying used is the environmentally best choice.
  - ensiferum 9y ago
    Buying no car is the best choice. From environmental perspective.
    - IncRnd 9y ago
      By extension, that also means that the best choice from an environmental perspective is not to have a cell phone, not to turn on the lights or A/C, not to use a computer or the Internet, and not to purchase pre-packaged food.
      - ensiferum 9y ago
        Absolutely.

pille 9y ago

Could you give an example? Not saying there isn't one, but I haven't noticed a major trend of increasing fuel efficiency for a given model over the past 10 years. It looks like the difference would have to offset 2000$/year (so, what about 20-40 full tanks/yr in the EU?). Or do you mean there are just more hybrids and electrics available now than there were 10 years ago?

adrianN 9y ago
Average consumption of a new car in Germany has gone down ~30% in the last ten years: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/185831/umfrage/kraftstoffverbrauch-von-neuzugelassenen-pkw-in-deutschland/ https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/185831/umfrag... But it might be more interesting to look for, say, the lower 30 percentile. I have the feeling that the improvement at the lower end is not as great, but I don't have numbers to back that up.
jameshart 9y ago
Why look to ten year trends? That graph has the extreme case of buying ten year old cars and keeping them for five years - meaning with that strategy you are at times driving a car which is fifteen years behind the curve of fuel efficiency development. Not to mention the effect that 15 years of engine wear has on the efficiency of the specific car. To get specific: a 2017 Ford F-150 (to stick with the absurdly parochial example used here) gets 19-26mpg; a 2002 F-150 got 17-21 - that may not look like much but is a 12-25% improvement, not a completely insignificant difference. A 1987 f150 got 10-12mpg, so it's clearly a continuing trend, too.
omegote 9y ago
A ten year old car with 100hp using 95 octanes could make on average about 8l/100km. Currently they're about 5l to 6l on average. On 1000km that's close to 30l, with a rate of 1.20€ per litter that's 36€. On a lifespan of 150k that's 5400€.
jdietrich 9y ago
Given the Volkswagen affair, I'm not sure that any official efficiency figures can be trusted. Improvements in average efficiency might be genuine, or they might be the result of gamesmanship to meet CAFE requirements.

ams6110 9y ago

Tires are not equivalent either. Tires for a truck or SUV, or for a high performance car, can be 5x or more the price compared to tires for a small economy car.

linopolus 9y ago

I rather find the trend going upwards. My 2002 VW Golf 4 Variant (station wagon) consumes 5-6l/100km(47-39MPG) (Diesel), and I often drive rather fast and furious, can get it down to 4,5l (52MPG) by slowing a bit down. Try to find a current car that size and power (1,3tons empty, 100hp) consuming less (measured, not the manufacturers claims). The downwards trend is not coming from similar vehicles slurping less, but from more people buying extremely small cars, like VW Up. At least in Germany. All my humble opinion.

trgn 9y ago
Absolutely a factor. Fuel efficiency gains gets wasted on a lot of car models as they got larger and heavier. And it's larger and heavier cars that are the top sellers now (not just US, even in Europe cars are more bloated on the whole than 20 years ago). Government should tax cars by weight. The heavier a car is, all other things being equal, the greater it's negative externalities. Heavy vehicles cause more road wear&tear, take up more street parking space, are more dangerous to other road users if an accident occurs, reduce visibility more greatly for other road users, worse for the environment. In the large car arms race, everybody is a loser. Plus, smaller cars are just more fun to own and drive, heh!