I was driving home today, listening to an NPR article about car companies and fleet mileage, and how they seem to have all the technical bugs worked out for their European sales (which meet much stricter standards, albeit at a not-insignificant surcharge) but keep claiming that the know-how and smarts just aren’t there for the domestic auto manufacturers to build cars that get decent mileage here …
And it occurred to me that (a) both of the vehicles we’re considering in our car choice get 18 mpg, highway, and (b) do we really, truly, honestly need a vehicle that large?
What if we bought a Subaru Legacy, for example (the model better known, in its most common hatchback dress, as the “Outback”)? Well …
For example, a Subaru Outback Limited wagon has roughly the same interior dimensions as a Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited. They both have full-time all-wheel-drive and they have the same luxury equipment. The Jeep costs about $8000 more than the Legacy (most of it profit for Daimler-Chrysler). However, that’s not the only difference between them. The Legacy averages 28 miles per gallon on the highway, while the V-8 powered Jeep gets 60 % of that (17 mpg).
I got home and broached this with Margie. She said she’d been thinking sort of the same thing.
Consider our requirements:
- All Wheel Drive. Well, that’s my requirement, and Margie isn’t kicking over that. But there are plenty of vehicles of a smaller size that offer that (e.g., other Subarus).
- Can fit five in relative comfort. A sedan-sized vehicle isn’t going to be as comfy as a mini-van, but the times we travel for any more than half an hour with five in the car are going to be few and far between. Does that fail the “drive to Grand Junction with the grandparents in the vehicle” test? Well — it becomes a bit more snug, but, then, we do something like that maybe once a year. And the space issue has gotten easier since Kitten started being able to ride (in some cars) without a booster seat.
- Transport full-sized sheets of plywood. Which I don’t think we could do in the Tribeca, but could do in the van. But, again … how many more full-sized sheets of plywood (drywall, etc.) are we likely to transport in the future? Not many, I suspect. And …
There’s this great concept called rentals. Transporting large things (like full sheets of plywood and lumber) from Home Depot? Pay $15 to rent a truck for 45 minutes; you can make that up in fuel costs in a week, easy. Having the grandparents in and going to Grand Junction? Rent a van. Etc.
Or, alternately, if we’re a group of six or seven … maybe we take a second car. That costs extra money, too, of course, but it’s also an ad hoc sort of thing.
Note that a smaller vehicle would also fit in the garage more easily.
Now, of course, going this route does come with some significant disavantages. Largest of which is that it throws the field back open, a field in which we’ve been dithering for months (perhaps out of a sense of submerged guilt). But, heck, that may be a small price to pay.
Pondering …
Well, the Subaru Legacy/Outback is a fine choice. But we’ve been very happy with the Ford Escape Hybrid, not least because of the good mileage (great by SUV standards). As an SUV, it sits up higher and there’s plenty of cargo space. It’s not necessary to get all the bells and whistles, although it’s darn fun watching the optional power display (it’s in gas mode! it’s in electric mode! Now it’s in a combination of gas and electric!). My husband David gets a lot of geeky pleasure out of hitting the mileage “sweet spot,” and out of taking a slower frontage road the last few blocks before home so as to be in fully electric mode the whole way.
That said, when we’re ready to trade in our old RAV4 (another great car-based SUV that gets pretty good mileage) I might be looking at Subarus, because I’ve always liked them, and lots of friends owned and liked them too.
Well, we’re big Subaru fans, so that’s a natural choice for me. Margie’s definitely interested in the hybrids, too.
I’m happy with my Legacy/Outback: good fuel economy, low maintenance costs(fingers crossed), and the all-wheel drive has been a big help on the icy roads.
If I were you I would stay away from SUVs. They are the least safe for non-commercial use (Not just for pedestrians, but for the driver, passengers, and those in other vehicles), they tend to have higher maitenance costs than other vehicles, and the tend to have higher costs in accidents under 15mph.
I would go with a van like the Honda Odyssey. Year after year it does the best of any other van, and gets 19/26 mpg. Not as good as the Subaru, but still respectable.
Well, that would take us back to the Sienna, which would give us AWD. 😛
Like I’ve said, my moms Outback 3.0 L.L. Bean is a cargasm, ;P And it gets better milage than any SUV/Truck Hybred (My mom was looking at the Hybreds and decided to wait until Subaru comes out with one). Also, my mom has solved the whole hauling heavy things by calling me to use the Explorer when needed for hauling (as well as my Dad, who has the 2.5 XT…same colour as my Mom’s, which really freaks me out. ;P).
Again, the ‘ru comes with a useful and heavy duty roof rack and you can get the covered attachment for more hauling sqft.
For Mountain driving (which you almost never do) the 3.0 will do 70/65 right up to the tunnel loaded. Last summer for the drive my to Grand mothers Funeral I was able to get it from Broomfield to Lincoln on a tank of Gas doing an average of 77mph (roughly 489 miles).
The LE and XLE look pretty sweet. MPG is 18/23 so not that bad at all for an AWD van, but again not even close to the Subaru.
Coming from a family that has owned vans since the original Dodge Caravan, I can say that vans rock. Whatever you choose I recommend getting something you plan on keeping for 5-10 years. So if the utility of option A is only a couple of years, go with option B.
I wondered about this when you first started posting about a new vehicle. Weighing the finances of renting when necessary against gas mileage makes buyer the better mileage car a better choice, to me.
Also, one things you haven’t considered, is that the optimal times of taking you, Margie, the rents and Katherine for a road trip together are going to end in say 3-4 years. The interactions are going to change and buying that extra space my not be cost effective.
Maybe. Though, on the other hand, being able to haul around Katherine and her five friends to an event might be a desirable thing, too (or it might be a PitA, or both). Hard to say.
Still … thinking favorably about this idea, dagnabbit. We’re not going to be all Doycean with the mileage and all, but we should be able to get something a good tier above what we’ve been talking about with the Sienna/Tribeca option.
I drive (you might have glimpsed it at the SotC thing) a 1984 Ford LTD Crown Victoria Station Wagon.
It gets better mileage than the SUV my parents have. Which is sad.
When I know I’m going to Denver over a weekend, and that I may be back and forth from the Springs more than once, I’ve been known to take the Enterprise deal of half-off weekends. It makes it about $45 without additional insurance (which I’m already covered for through my regular car insurance) or call it $65 with gas, or $20 over one fill of my tank. It takes me about 3/4 a tank to go directly back and forth. If I’m not doing ANY driving in Denver, I do better with the Station Wagon. If I’m going to be driving, it’s better to get the rental.
Someday we’ll be able to afford a better (meaning “more fuel efficient”) car for me. The advantages of a Station Wagon are, of course, twofold: A) steel. No one wants to run into me. B) cargo or passenger space: if I’m taking sisters, dog, parental unit types, luggage, sound equipment, boats, whatnot, it’s better than the Subaru we’ve got as our other main car. (Seats five and our dog.)
hrm, I forgot to mention that the previous “best” was my ’84 Celica GT on the Broomfield to Omaha run was (remember that this was back in 55mph days) at an average of 64mph and stopping in York, NE (roughly 440 miles) for the refill.
The only thing I would gig the ‘ru on is turning radius, other than that, if I had the money it would be a debate between Subaru and Audi. But then again, if I had the Money I would get something like a Scion Tc or Xa, a Toyota Yuris, a SmartCar or a Honda Fit for commuting and mid Sized SUV for those times that you need one, but that is if I had the money. ;P
Re:moving children.
1) They’re smaller and take up less space (at least for a while).
2) It’s less important that they’re comfortable (especially over a short trip).
3) Limited space means fewer children that you take on outings – a built-in limiting device. Do you really want to be able to take 6 children anywhere?
My girlfriend is set on the Toyota Yaris. How can you beat a car that gets awesome gas mileage for only $12,000. I just wish Toyota turned the Toyota Yaris Hybrid concept into reality. That would be cool!
Me, I am dead set on this bad boy; Phoenix Motorcars Sport Utility Truck!
I would quote something, but the main page sums it up for me… Bad Ass!
Wonderful you’re moving gas mileage up a notch on the consideration scale. Wish everyone would do that.
We’ve been very happy with our 2000 LE.
We average 6-7 years … our cunning financial plan being doing 3-year financing for a new car, at which time we buy a replacement for the other vehicle (the time it takes us to search simply building up our down payment, since it’s all through an automatic deposit/withdrawal account). That’s a good time frame, since by then plastic pieces are beginning to snap off, major engine parts are beginning to need replacement, etc.
The Outback is definitely on my list. Not sure if I’ll go for the LL Bean packaging, but I did note to Margie that it comes with a turbo option …
Thanks. I do know that for some folks it’s not practical — but it is for a lot more folks than factor it in.