Advocacy & Safety - Cheapest places to own a car...

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1719/the-cheapest-cities-to-own-a-car/

OK the focus was on US places to own a car... take a look at the report, no matter which "cheapest place" it is, it will still run you over $3000 a year to provide for gas, insurance and basic maintenance.

You can buy some pretty nice bikes for under $3000, and still have change for bike clothes, bags and other accessories... and every year after that, you are saving money.

Honolulu, Hawaii
Total cost: $3,686

Contributing factors: Honolulu has the shortest average commute of all the cities on this list, at 22.5 miles daily, and it also fares well in the annual fuel cost at $1,594. Think of how low that cost would be if the gas weren't $3.65 per gallon of regular. That rate results in a steep $95 wasted annually negotiating Honolulu's daily 4.3 hours of congestion. Well, I can get a $3k bike, have $686 for clothes and other accessaries and then buy additional bikes with the $1,200 cash back for NOT parking at work.

Or I could just use the extra money to buy a bike in California and go touring for vacation.

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1719/the-cheapest-cities-to-own-a-car/

OK the focus was on US places to own a car... take a look at the report, no matter which "cheapest place" it is, it will still run you over $3000 a year to provide for gas, insurance and basic maintenance.

You can buy some pretty nice bikes for under $3000, and still have change for bike clothes, bags and other accessories... and every year after that, you are saving money.
So? Why does this have to be an either or situation?

So? Why does this have to be an either or situation?

it doesn't, unless you plan on saving 3K or more a year...

Interesting link, thanks for posting genec.

OK the focus was on US places to own a car... take a look at the report, no matter which "cheapest place" it is, it will still run you over $3000 a year to provide for gas, insurance and basic maintenance.
Depends on how much you use it. I live in one of the more expensive places in the US but the fixed costs of keeping the car in the driveway only add up to about $350/yr. (for insurance, registration, inspection, and sched. mtce.). Obviously when it's driven that cost goes up for gas and possibly additional maintenance, but then using my bikes isn't quite free either with extra costs for tires, chains, and most significantly food. The bikes are still cheaper per mile, but the difference isn't very great. But car costs also tend to rise because the ease of driving makes us more likely to travel farther than really necessary.

Depends on how much you use it. I live in one of the more expensive places in the US but the fixed costs of keeping the car in the driveway only add up to about $350/yr. (for insurance, registration, inspection, and sched. mtce.). Obviously when it's driven that cost goes up for gas and possibly additional maintenance, but then using my bikes isn't quite free either with extra costs for tires, chains, and most significantly food. The bikes are still cheaper per mile, but the difference isn't very great. But car costs also tend to rise because the ease of driving makes us more likely to travel farther than really necessary.

I believe the article means "operate" when it says "own."

Article doesn't really provide enough information to determine how they are arriving at those numbers ($1100/year for insurance considered cheap?) and has some statements that indicate their numbers may be based upon questionable assumptions; "...drivers lose less in wages..." related to traffic congestion...

As to bike being cheaper--though precisely how much is questionable, yes they are; however, they also are less functional and frankly not practical for most...

Article doesn't really provide enough information to determine how they are arriving at those numbers ($1100/year for insurance considered cheap?) and has some statements that indicate their numbers may be based upon questionable assumptions; "...drivers lose less in wages..." related to traffic congestion...

As to bike being cheaper--though precisely how much is questionable, yes they are; however, they also are less functional and frankly not practical for most...

For full coverage and comprehensive on a car with some resell value I'm not sure $1,100 is high.

I bet these are averages, which means it's probably highly affected by how much people there tend to spend on their cars. So, affluent communities are gonna tend to have high costs, even though those costs are self imposed.

Attempts to cost congestion are a little suspect. But, time has real value to people, and one way to provide a reasonable dollar estimate is to just use their pay. If you look at the Columbus one they break that out in such a manner that you get a peak at how they were calculating that. And they indicate gas spent in congestion separately so it's not that.

Honolulu, Hawaii
Total cost: $3,686

Contributing factors: Honolulu has the shortest average commute of all the cities on this list, at 22.5 miles daily, and it also fares well in the annual fuel cost at $1,594. Think of how low that cost would be if the gas weren't $3.65 per gallon of regular. That rate results in a steep $95 wasted annually negotiating Honolulu's daily 4.3 hours of congestion.


myrridin

As to bike being cheaper--though precisely how much is questionable, yes they are; however, they also are less functional and frankly not practical for most...

Ok, so maybe 22.5 miles a day commuting Isn't much for a seasoned North American "commuter cyclist", But over 10 miles each way is a bit much to expect from a much larger percentage of the population than is already doing it. It is one of the sad facts of sprawl.

I am no expert on any of the Cities layouts on that list, but I can make a semi educated guess that they are not exactly the 11 densest population centers in the U.S. Yes, all that extra room means that owning a car in those cities is "cheap", but it also means that you *have* to own a car.

Ok, so maybe 22.5 miles a day commuting Isn't much for a seasoned North American "commuter cyclist", But over 10 miles each way is a bit much to expect from a much larger percentage of the population than is already doing it. It is one of the sad facts of sprawl.
Only because they are fat and lazy from sitting on the couch and in the car.

Well, I've never been there, but it looks like in Honolulu about a third of the area is in the city, which isn't all that big. And the other 2/3 are in other cities separated by, I assume, mountains. So you probably have lots of 5 mile commutes and lots of 20 mile commutes.

Well, I've never been there, but it looks like in Honolulu about a third of the area is in the city, which isn't all that big. And the other 2/3 are in other cities separated by, I assume, mountains. So you probably have lots of 5 mile commutes and lots of 20 mile commutes.

Yes, this is the case, give or take the "separated by mountains" in some locations. My daily commute in Honolulu is 3.5 mi r/t and I could easily get by without a car. Averages are just that, and not directly applicable to individual cases.
My guess is that you could be car-free in many cities IF you're willing/able to live near work and shopping and there's a public transportation option that's at least halfway decent. OTOH I don't have kids and that could be a game changer, although one of my neighbors has managed to raise two kids without driving.

For full coverage and comprehensive on a car with some resell value I'm not sure $1,100 is high.

I bet these are averages, which means it's probably highly affected by how much people there tend to spend on their cars. So, affluent communities are gonna tend to have high costs, even though those costs are self imposed.

Attempts to cost congestion are a little suspect. But, time has real value to people, and one way to provide a reasonable dollar estimate is to just use their pay. If you look at the Columbus one they break that out in such a manner that you get a peak at how they were calculating that. And they indicate gas spent in congestion separately so it's not that.

I own a car with a current value in excess of 20k and carry full coverage including 1million in liability for less than $750/yr in a affluent community in a major metropolitan area. $1100/yr is not cheap.

Also the value of non-work time is problematic. It certainly doesn't approach the $10+/hr used in the article.

The article is simply based upon an incorrect analysis.

I own a car with a current value in excess of 20k and carry full coverage including 1million in liability for less than $750/yr in a affluent community in a major metropolitan area. $1100/yr is not cheap.

Also the value of non-work time is problematic. It certainly doesn't approach the $10+/hr used in the article.

The article is simply based upon an incorrect analysis.

http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content17532.aspx

$1,100 is low.

http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content17532.aspx

$1,100 is low.

Seems so, I will have to thank my agent next time I talk with them.

Doesn't change that the article uses a faulty approach to their analysis. The number may be lower, it may be higher, but I would suspect it should be higher, since they didn't appear to take into account the cost of the vehicle itself.

Either way, this type of analysis is not really useful when claiming that bicycling is cheaper than driving. The two don't compare very well--different types of travel typically. It also overlooks that there is overlap in the costs. It is very easy for someone to drive cheaply (cheap vehicle, low mileage, bare minimum) and equally possible for someone to cycle very expensively.

It would be interesting to compare the total transportation costs for the car free versus the car based over the long term. My suspician is that when compared on a per mile basis, you wouldn't find much difference, unfortunately I know of no study/data available to support a conclusion either way.

Seems so, I will have to thank my agent next time I talk with them.

Thank your age and driving record. At my age, even with a perfect driving record, I still pay quite a bit more than you do on a car that's worth significantly less.




Doesn't change that the article uses a faulty approach to their analysis. The number may be lower, it may be higher, but I would suspect it should be higher, since they didn't appear to take into account the cost of the vehicle itself.


I bet that's it, I bet they just didn't include the cost of the car (and maybe maintenance too). Maybe that's what they mean by "cost of ownership." It's a very funny line to split, but if you were thinking about it in a "I might move somewhere and I drive" perspective it makes sense: You control the car, repairs (to some extent). But how far you drive, how bad other drivers are (insurance), etc are heavily influenced by the city and people there.

You'd want to know how much time you'll waste in congestion too, although including it as an average hourly wage isn't nearly as helpful as just saying how long you'll spend. But I suppose they also need a single number to sort the cities by.





Either way, this type of analysis is not really useful when claiming that bicycling is cheaper than driving. The two don't compare very well--different types of travel typically. It also overlooks that there is overlap in the costs. It is very easy for someone to drive cheaply (cheap vehicle, low mileage, bare minimum) and equally possible for someone to cycle very expensively.


I drove cheaply and sold a car to start biking for those trips. Saves me a heck of a lot more than biking and owning the car. And this article highlights, to some extent, how expensive that car is when it's parked. But yea, it's a really confusing way to look at it. But that wasn't the point of the article, it was someones one off comment when they linked to it. Don't read a PhD thesis into a bikeforums post.



It would be interesting to compare the total transportation costs for the car free versus the car based over the long term. My suspician is that when compared on a per mile basis, you wouldn't find much difference, unfortunately I know of no study/data available to support a conclusion either way.

On an individual level? In three years I've spent about as much on my bike, clothes, accessories as I needed to fix the car I sold. The food is somewhat meaningless as I'd eat it anyway and my commuting amounts to less aerobic exercise than I really need. And the stuff on the bike has a lot more life left in it.

Of course it's cheaper. You have to eat like a king or spend foolishly on your bike to crack $.30 a mile.

But then I buy other bikes and go ride for fun/sport/exercise and that savings is long since gone.

[/URL][URL]http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content17532.aspx (http://%3Ca%20href=%22http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content17532.aspx%22%20target=%22_blank%22%3Ehttp://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content17532.aspx%3C/a%3E)

$1,100 is low.

Remember that an average is going to factor in driving record, credit scores (legal for insurance underwriting in many/most places), age, etc. It's likely being dragged up by all the families with teenagers, etc, as well as the people with DUIs on their records who pay through the nose. I don't have a car that is worth as much as myrridin's (I tend to keep my cars as long as possible), but I only pay about $525/year for insurance, and I have pretty high liability, property damage, comprehensive, etc. You save a LOT if you a) don't get any accidents or tickets, b) have good credit, c) are married/over 25, d) never make any claims for minor stuff, e) live in a low crime area, and f) don't drive a huge amount of miles. Most of these factors are under your control, except for the age/gender thing. Especially the mileage thing saves you a lot: I talk to friends and coworkers who tell me they drive 30,000 miles/year, and I'm like WTF? I think about 8,000/miles in a year is the most I've EVER driven, and it's not like I never go out of town or anything. The average American must practically live in their car.

[QUOTE=genec;12228120....., no matter which "cheapest place" it is, it will still run you over $3000 a year to provide for gas, insurance and basic maintenance.

.....[/QUOTE]

Good post. I think that people forget about the total of these costs. I went carless for the last couple years by giving a buddy $20 a month to take me along when he goes grocery shopping so I could get mine done---which is about all I need a car for. Since he was going anyway, and since I saved (10 x $30 )=300 a month, i'd daresay it was a bargain.

Remember that an average is going to factor in driving record, credit scores (legal for insurance underwriting in many/most places), age, etc. It's likely being dragged up by all the families with teenagers, etc, as well as the people with DUIs on their records who pay through the nose. I don't have a car that is worth as much as myrridin's (I tend to keep my cars as long as possible), but I only pay about $525/year for insurance, and I have pretty high liability, property damage, comprehensive, etc. You save a LOT if you a) don't get any accidents or tickets, b) have good credit, c) are married/over 25, d) never make any claims for minor stuff, e) live in a low crime area, and f) don't drive a huge amount of miles. Most of these factors are under your control, except for the age/gender thing. Especially the mileage thing saves you a lot: I talk to friends and coworkers who tell me they drive 30,000 miles/year, and I'm like WTF? I think about 8,000/miles in a year is the most I've EVER driven, and it's not like I never go out of town or anything. The average American must practically live in their car.

Yes, I'm well aware of how all of that works. Which is why I told myrridin he should thank his age and driving record more than his insurer :). Hmm, I wonder if when my wife turns 26 I'll get a nice break on the auto insurance...

http://www.guzer.com/pictures/car-tiny-island.jpg

This looks pretty cheap ... might cost a hundred bucks to get the car there, but beyond that, little need for insurance, gas, maintenance. Salt water might make it rust prematurely, so a few hundred dollars for undercoating?

Good post. I think that people forget about the total of these costs. I went carless for the last couple years by giving a buddy $20 a month to take me along when he goes grocery shopping so I could get mine done---which is about all I need a car for. Since he was going anyway, and since I saved (10 x $30 )=300 a month, i'd daresay it was a bargain.

This is largely my point about the article. It makes mistakes in how it calculates driving costs, and it doesn't really even explain its method.

One item that appears to be missing from the articles calculations is the cost of the vehicle. Something that is a significant component of the cost of driving. I have just obtained the data from the 2009 National Household Travel Survey, which should allow the calculation of both regional and national costs of ownership based upon relevant driving data. A really interesting data set which includes data on all transportation modes. If anyone is interested, send me an IM and I'll provide a link/R script to download the data into the freely available R statistics package

However, even with this data, I still haven't found any way to perform a comparable calculation for the costs associated with using a bicycle as transportation... So as yet no way to test my hypothesis that the costs on a per mile basis don't end up that different.