4 ms·

How to beat high airfares...drive.

rexreed 15y ago
At $4 a gallon, I might even challenge that. I recently calculated the cost of driving from DC to Boston, which is regularly a $240 or so ROUNDTRIP on many airlines. It takes 2 tanks of gas each way (about a 350 mile trip, 20 miles per gallon, 15 gallons per tank). The gas cost alone is close to $240. Even if you managed to burn 3 tanks instead of 4 during the trip, you're talking 45 gallons @ $4 a gallon, which is $180... and that's just gas. The tolls are around $20 each way. So, now you're up to $220. And what about food? Add another $20 or so. More maybe. So, now it costs the same to drive as it does to fly. And that's not even factoring in the cost of your TIME. It takes about 7 hours to drive from DC to Boston. It takes just over 1 hour by plane. Even factoring in the airport wait and transport, you're doing better... and you can do stuff while the plane flies while you can't do anything while you're driving. And then there's traffic. And the wear and tear on your vehicle. And this is for a relatively short trip. So, is driving really economically better? I did the math. I did the trip. It often doesn't make sense. Do the math yourself. Only for short trips does driving beat the cost of flying, and in which case, why you would be flying anyways? On the east coast, I just take the train or a bus. $20 gets you from DC to New York. Another $15 gets you to Boston. You can't beat THAT. So, the cost of gas has completely changed the economics and argument of drive vs. fly. Flying is almost always going to be cheaper, if you can book your flight early enough to get the discounted fares.
- ecuzzillo 15y ago
  I don't disagree, but to be fair about the time, there's at least an hour in the DC airport and at least half an hour in the Boston airport, and that's assuming there are no delays on either tarmac due to planes being in the way of your gate or your plane needing something inspected or replaced. So it's more like 2.5-3 hours vs. 7 hours. Still probably worth the flight, depending on how much you like driving, but I think most people think only about the actual flying time, rather than the total time spent dealing with the airport process.
- kd0amg 15y ago
  about a 350 mile trip, 20 miles per gallon That would be 17.5 gallons each way, not 30. The round trip is then 35 gallons, which should easily be less than three 15-gallon tanks. Even 450 miles each way fits in three tanks. Only for short trips does driving beat the cost of flying I don't know how much you can stick to highways on that DC-Boston route, but when I drive down to visit my parents, each way is 400 miles on 15 gallons. Even at $4.50 per gallon (and I'd likely pay a fair bit less than that after the return trip), I spend half as much on gas as I'd spend on air fare. Then there's the cost of transit to and from the airports (which I'd get hit with again in the too-likely event of a flight cancellation). I'm not sure I'd count eating as a cost advantage for flying: I can pack a lunch in the car if I want to eat cheap. The only advantages of flying are saving three hours of travel time in each direction and having a couple more hours when I don't have to pay attention to anything in particular (I can read or sleep instead of watching the road).
  - rexreed 15y ago
    In my case, I need to refill my 15 gallon tank 3 times for the whole roundtrip. So, my best case is 45 gallons, which at $4/gal is $180. It's true I'm left with some gas at the end, so perhaps that skews the calculation. If I could refill it with just enough, I could shave some bucks. But I prefer not to return home on empty fumes. Next time you do the trip - calculate the cost. You'll see it's closer to the best airfare you can get on that route than you might think. If you prefer to fully-load the airport commute and wait time, then you can equalize the time cost. And then you'll be comparing the actual costs against the benefits. I've found that the driving cost even not factoring in time and food / other stuff, is remarkably close to the airfare. And don't forget the tolls. That adds close to $40. Blame the NJ Turnpike for much of that.
    - BrandonM 15y ago
      Why are you calculating based on number of tanks of fuel used when you can instead calculate the exact number of gallons? Obviously you have some fuel left when you get home; that doesn't count as part of the cost of travel because you'll then use it in your normal course of affairs. You've ignored the costs (both monetary and opportunity) of renting a vehicle or using public transit while in the destination city as opposed to having your own vehicle there. You've also ignored the potential harm of being confined to a cabin with scores of people who might be carrying airborne pathogens. You haven't considered the emotional cost of being subjected to an invasive search at the airport, or the stress of getting to your gate on-time. To be clear, I am not anti-flying. I just think it's a sad state of affairs when it's more economically rational for a single individual to drive 450 miles each way than it is to fly. Get a more efficient car, add another person or two, require some bags, or plan an extended stay, and anywhere within a 12-to-24-hour driving radius becomes an economically irrational flight.
- kijinbear 15y ago
  Driving can still be cheaper than flying if you have 2 or more people traveling together. It would be tough to beat trains and buses, though.
  - spc476 15y ago
    I'm not sure about trains. I actually looked into this, getting a train from Tuscaloosa to Las Vegas. The two cheapest round trip train tickets were more than twice the price of a round trip plane ticket. Also, both train routes took four days, both of which involved a bus ride on the last day. That's not to mention both train routes going through Chicago. It was crazy.
    - camiller 15y ago
      Once had a flight from Omaha to Evansville through St. Louis. At the gate in St. Louis the airline informed us that the flight was being canceled so they put us (10 passengers in all) in a van and drove us to the Evansville airport, dropped us off, and the driver drove away. The airport was closed! The only pay phone you could see was on the other side of locked doors! This was long enough ago that most of the passengers didn't have cell phones.
  - rexreed 15y ago
    Yes - and if you have lots of baggage too. Something to consider. Traveling with a family on a fairly short / medium-haul trip (no overnight stay necessary) with lots of baggage? Driving will trump airfare costs for certain.
  - dagw 15y ago
    It would be tough to beat trains and buses, though. In the case of trains, it depends very much on where you are and where you're going. For example flying between basically any two European capital cities is almost always cheaper than taking the train.
  - camiller 15y ago
    True, driving a family of four anywhere in the US is almost always cheaper than flying. And trains, not so much in the US unless you happen to have a fairly direct route. Omaha to Denver by train is OK, Topeka to Denver, nearly the same distance for practical purposes, but to take the train you have to go to Chicago then to Omaha, then to Denver.
- BrandonM 15y ago
  If you're driving alone from DC to Boston in a vehicle that only gets 20 mi/gal, you're doing something wrong.

At $4 a gallon, I might even challenge that. I recently calculated the cost of driving from DC to Boston, which is regularly a $240 or so ROUNDTRIP on many airlines. It takes 2 tanks of gas each way (about a 350 mile trip, 20 miles per gallon, 15 gallons per tank). The gas cost alone is close to $240. Even if you managed to burn 3 tanks instead of 4 during the trip, you're talking 45 gallons @ $4 a gallon, which is $180... and that's just gas. The tolls are around $20 each way. So, now you're up to $220. And what about food? Add another $20 or so. More maybe. So, now it costs the same to drive as it does to fly. And that's not even factoring in the cost of your TIME. It takes about 7 hours to drive from DC to Boston. It takes just over 1 hour by plane. Even factoring in the airport wait and transport, you're doing better... and you can do stuff while the plane flies while you can't do anything while you're driving. And then there's traffic. And the wear and tear on your vehicle. And this is for a relatively short trip. So, is driving really economically better? I did the math. I did the trip. It often doesn't make sense. Do the math yourself. Only for short trips does driving beat the cost of flying, and in which case, why you would be flying anyways? On the east coast, I just take the train or a bus. $20 gets you from DC to New York. Another $15 gets you to Boston. You can't beat THAT. So, the cost of gas has completely changed the economics and argument of drive vs. fly. Flying is almost always going to be cheaper, if you can book your flight early enough to get the discounted fares.

ecuzzillo 15y ago
I don't disagree, but to be fair about the time, there's at least an hour in the DC airport and at least half an hour in the Boston airport, and that's assuming there are no delays on either tarmac due to planes being in the way of your gate or your plane needing something inspected or replaced. So it's more like 2.5-3 hours vs. 7 hours. Still probably worth the flight, depending on how much you like driving, but I think most people think only about the actual flying time, rather than the total time spent dealing with the airport process.
kd0amg 15y ago
about a 350 mile trip, 20 miles per gallon That would be 17.5 gallons each way, not 30. The round trip is then 35 gallons, which should easily be less than three 15-gallon tanks. Even 450 miles each way fits in three tanks. Only for short trips does driving beat the cost of flying I don't know how much you can stick to highways on that DC-Boston route, but when I drive down to visit my parents, each way is 400 miles on 15 gallons. Even at $4.50 per gallon (and I'd likely pay a fair bit less than that after the return trip), I spend half as much on gas as I'd spend on air fare. Then there's the cost of transit to and from the airports (which I'd get hit with again in the too-likely event of a flight cancellation). I'm not sure I'd count eating as a cost advantage for flying: I can pack a lunch in the car if I want to eat cheap. The only advantages of flying are saving three hours of travel time in each direction and having a couple more hours when I don't have to pay attention to anything in particular (I can read or sleep instead of watching the road).
- rexreed 15y ago
  In my case, I need to refill my 15 gallon tank 3 times for the whole roundtrip. So, my best case is 45 gallons, which at $4/gal is $180. It's true I'm left with some gas at the end, so perhaps that skews the calculation. If I could refill it with just enough, I could shave some bucks. But I prefer not to return home on empty fumes. Next time you do the trip - calculate the cost. You'll see it's closer to the best airfare you can get on that route than you might think. If you prefer to fully-load the airport commute and wait time, then you can equalize the time cost. And then you'll be comparing the actual costs against the benefits. I've found that the driving cost even not factoring in time and food / other stuff, is remarkably close to the airfare. And don't forget the tolls. That adds close to $40. Blame the NJ Turnpike for much of that.
  - BrandonM 15y ago
    Why are you calculating based on number of tanks of fuel used when you can instead calculate the exact number of gallons? Obviously you have some fuel left when you get home; that doesn't count as part of the cost of travel because you'll then use it in your normal course of affairs. You've ignored the costs (both monetary and opportunity) of renting a vehicle or using public transit while in the destination city as opposed to having your own vehicle there. You've also ignored the potential harm of being confined to a cabin with scores of people who might be carrying airborne pathogens. You haven't considered the emotional cost of being subjected to an invasive search at the airport, or the stress of getting to your gate on-time. To be clear, I am not anti-flying. I just think it's a sad state of affairs when it's more economically rational for a single individual to drive 450 miles each way than it is to fly. Get a more efficient car, add another person or two, require some bags, or plan an extended stay, and anywhere within a 12-to-24-hour driving radius becomes an economically irrational flight.
kijinbear 15y ago
Driving can still be cheaper than flying if you have 2 or more people traveling together. It would be tough to beat trains and buses, though.
- spc476 15y ago
  I'm not sure about trains. I actually looked into this, getting a train from Tuscaloosa to Las Vegas. The two cheapest round trip train tickets were more than twice the price of a round trip plane ticket. Also, both train routes took four days, both of which involved a bus ride on the last day. That's not to mention both train routes going through Chicago. It was crazy.
  - camiller 15y ago
    Once had a flight from Omaha to Evansville through St. Louis. At the gate in St. Louis the airline informed us that the flight was being canceled so they put us (10 passengers in all) in a van and drove us to the Evansville airport, dropped us off, and the driver drove away. The airport was closed! The only pay phone you could see was on the other side of locked doors! This was long enough ago that most of the passengers didn't have cell phones.
- rexreed 15y ago
  Yes - and if you have lots of baggage too. Something to consider. Traveling with a family on a fairly short / medium-haul trip (no overnight stay necessary) with lots of baggage? Driving will trump airfare costs for certain.
- dagw 15y ago
  It would be tough to beat trains and buses, though. In the case of trains, it depends very much on where you are and where you're going. For example flying between basically any two European capital cities is almost always cheaper than taking the train.
- camiller 15y ago
  True, driving a family of four anywhere in the US is almost always cheaper than flying. And trains, not so much in the US unless you happen to have a fairly direct route. Omaha to Denver by train is OK, Topeka to Denver, nearly the same distance for practical purposes, but to take the train you have to go to Chicago then to Omaha, then to Denver.
BrandonM 15y ago
If you're driving alone from DC to Boston in a vehicle that only gets 20 mi/gal, you're doing something wrong.