3 ms·

The comparison is on cost. It is explicitly not a goal to include something like how it feels to drive one. I don't like cars, and none of them feel good to dri

by usea 3y ago

The comparison is on cost. It is explicitly not a goal to include something like how it feels to drive one. I don't like cars, and none of them feel good to drive. I don't want a car, but I have to own one for transportation. I want to own the cheapest one I can that can still reasonably and safely get me around. I don't care that you think it's ugly or whatever. I'm not using that as criteria. You have no reason to question my motivation, and it's unreasonable to make up possible deficiencies you imagine my methodology might have without even attempting to understand what is there. I provided plenty of information. The link works. Depreciation never enters into it, nor should it. The model is that you buy the car, drive it for ten years, and then add up how much you spent on everything: The original purchase, fuel, maintenance, insurace, registration, etc. The value of the vehicle at any point after you buy it is irrelevant. You never sell it. It simply ceases to exist at the end of ten years. If you think I should include a sale price in the model, it will not be favorable to the car that sells for 15k less at t=0 and is 7 years older. But I'm not including that, because it's not useful. I'm looking at the cost for driving a car for ten years. When I do, a new bolt is cheaper than a used civic. The prices are very similar (18k vs 19.5k) after tax break. And the electric one costs a lot less to drive over time, so after ten years you spent less money. It's not complicated, and the math bears it out easily. I brought receipts. Just look at them. Or do it yourself. Or propose your own model.

jjav 3y ago
> Depreciation never enters into it, nor should it. Well that is not a realistic comparison. Residual value absolutely must be considered in the comparison. (I don't know which car it would favor, didn't try to research that. But either way, you need to include the residual value in the computation.) > It simply ceases to exist at the end of ten years. I mean but of course it doesn't! The car doesn't evaporate. You can sell it after those 10 years and get some money back. It's not realistic to just ignore that.
- usea 3y ago
  You're right, the model would be improved by adding depreciation. I suspect it would increase the disparity, making the Bolt even cheaper. But I don't know that without looking into it more. I think I will at least look at the topic when I do this again next year. Thanks for bringing it up to me. There are lots of other things not included in the model, too. I would need to pay a contractor to add a 240 outlet to my garage, which will be like $500 since it's next to the breaker box. I will also spend hours of my life waiting for the car to charge during trips over those ten years. I bet people probably underestimate how much that will suck before they buy an EV. I could include a healthcare cost adjustment due to safety ratings, the impact of which I probably grossly underestimate. I think the biggest omission is change in the gas:electricity price ratio over ten years. Using current values for the whole ten years is a mistake, considering it's the main difference between the options and is likely to change a lot. edit: also I'm sorry for the tone of my previous post. I didn't mean for it to sound that way.
  - jjav 3y ago
    > I suspect it would increase the disparity, making the Bolt even cheaper. Depends, but depreciation generally benefits older cars and hurts new cars. If you buy a Civic that has depreciated to 5-6K, there's not a lot of room to depreciate more. Unless it completely dies, you can use it for a long time and it's still worth 3-5K. Occasionally older cars even go up in value. I bought an Acura for 6K and sold it for 6K almost 15 years later. I bought a Mazda for 3K and sold it for 6K nine years later. New cars are the worst for depreciation, the moment you drive out the dealer lot it's worth thousands less. And over a few years, the depreciation curve is quite steep until it flattens later. Very brand/model dependent so YMMV.

by usea 3y ago

jjav 3y ago

> Depreciation never enters into it, nor should it. Well that is not a realistic comparison. Residual value absolutely must be considered in the comparison. (I don't know which car it would favor, didn't try to research that. But either way, you need to include the residual value in the computation.) > It simply ceases to exist at the end of ten years. I mean but of course it doesn't! The car doesn't evaporate. You can sell it after those 10 years and get some money back. It's not realistic to just ignore that.

usea 3y ago
You're right, the model would be improved by adding depreciation. I suspect it would increase the disparity, making the Bolt even cheaper. But I don't know that without looking into it more. I think I will at least look at the topic when I do this again next year. Thanks for bringing it up to me. There are lots of other things not included in the model, too. I would need to pay a contractor to add a 240 outlet to my garage, which will be like $500 since it's next to the breaker box. I will also spend hours of my life waiting for the car to charge during trips over those ten years. I bet people probably underestimate how much that will suck before they buy an EV. I could include a healthcare cost adjustment due to safety ratings, the impact of which I probably grossly underestimate. I think the biggest omission is change in the gas:electricity price ratio over ten years. Using current values for the whole ten years is a mistake, considering it's the main difference between the options and is likely to change a lot. edit: also I'm sorry for the tone of my previous post. I didn't mean for it to sound that way.
- jjav 3y ago
  > I suspect it would increase the disparity, making the Bolt even cheaper. Depends, but depreciation generally benefits older cars and hurts new cars. If you buy a Civic that has depreciated to 5-6K, there's not a lot of room to depreciate more. Unless it completely dies, you can use it for a long time and it's still worth 3-5K. Occasionally older cars even go up in value. I bought an Acura for 6K and sold it for 6K almost 15 years later. I bought a Mazda for 3K and sold it for 6K nine years later. New cars are the worst for depreciation, the moment you drive out the dealer lot it's worth thousands less. And over a few years, the depreciation curve is quite steep until it flattens later. Very brand/model dependent so YMMV.