The folks at the AAA issued the results of their annual "Your Driving Costs" study Tuesday, and
the bottom line isn't pretty - the overall average cost of owning and operating your late model ride in the U.S. is
about 52.2 cents per mile, or $7,834 per year, if you drive 15,000 miles.Triple-A bases its estimates on the all-in costs of owning a new car, including depreciation, finance charges, insurance, registration, maintenance, and, of course, gas prices. Your circumstances may well be different, of course, so the Driving Costs report includes a handy worksheet for you to calculate the bad news yourself.
The full report is available here, and breaks down driving costs for small, medium and large sedans, as well as SUVs and Minivans. The per mile costs vary from a low of 41.7 cents for an average of the five best-selling small sedans, to a high of 65.4 cents for an SUV.
[Source: AAA]
Saleen makes new value-oriented Racecraft brand official
Officially Official: 2009 BMW 7 Series
Officially Official: 2009 Ford Focus RS
I want my FPV: Super sedans hit the desert in new TV spot
Happy Independence Day from Autoblog
Track Test: 2008 Roush 427R Trak Pak Mustang
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Porsche Cayman S
First Drive: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Mazda MX-5 Miata Retractable Hard Top
In The Autoblog Garage: BMW 128i Convertible
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Bob @ Mar 29th 2006 3:20PM
So if I drive my car until it dies, meaning 150,000+ miles, is depreciation really a valid part of the equation?
Non-Bizarro Adam @ Mar 29th 2006 3:34PM
Bob (#1), yes, because now you have a car with virtually no value. If you drive a car for 10,000 miles, and sell it, it still has value that you can put towards a new car.
That being said, it probably makes more sense to drive the car for 150,000 miles, as long as maintenance costs aren't too high, for the simple fact that a car depreciates at the highest rate right after it is purchased, so the longer you drive the car, the less depreciation costs you less per mile.
doug @ Mar 29th 2006 3:34PM
Yes, depreciation still counts. Even if you drive your car until it dies, all that means is you used up the total price you paid originally, instead of selling it and getting whatever value is left. The depreciation of the value of the car is still occurring, and since you paid for it, it is still money lost.
SleighBoy @ Mar 29th 2006 3:35PM
#1, You think a car will die at 150k? For a good car that is the broken-in age. Some people can take care of their cars to 500k and some trash them by 100k or less. It all depends on the owner.
bernie @ Mar 29th 2006 3:55PM
If only such information would convince Americans:
1) To get out of drive through lines
2) To put kids on a school bus instead of driving them
3) To move closer to work
4) To park farther away and walk instead of hovering
5) To combine errands and use a vehicle just large enough to get the job done
But it won't, and the world hates us for our stubbornness and greed.
DriftPunch @ Mar 29th 2006 4:07PM
The variance of what people spend on auto's and keeping them on the road makes this data kind of useless. While they may be sound, too much choice is involved to make them useful in decisionmaking. It's no different than comparing grocery bills. A single person can spend little on a nutritious haul, whereas another can spend a fortune on name brand snack food. The choice factor changes the way the commidity is viewed.
This being said, what some pay in insurance in other parts of the country blow my mind. I pay ~$900 a year for a 1994 GMC and a 1999 4Runner here in Central Virginia.
DriftPunch @ Mar 29th 2006 4:15PM
"But it won't, and the world hates us for our stubbornness and greed."
Funny how lefties say this in deference to Europe, but ignore the fact that the expenses which drive the Europeans' automotive and transportation choices are mainly a result of taxation, and NOT limited supply. What entity is greedy again?
Charles S @ Mar 29th 2006 6:07PM
"transportation choices are mainly a result of taxation"
Really? So if all gov't was to remove all forms of taxation today, every European (and Japanese) would start driving right away? Seriously, go live in New York or San Francisco, and see how great it is to own a car? Heck, go visit kids who live in large college campuses, and let's see how "affordable" and useful a car is. The point is that while plenty of people would love to own a car, it is not always better to do so, and taxation itself is NOT the prime reason why people decide not to drive.
Let's say that we do live in a fantasy world where we encourage everyone to own a car and drive; where there is no regulations, no taxes, NO public transportation! That would be GREAT for your wallet. Take out all the safety and emission features and we all can save a couple grand! Besides the obvious problems with pollutions, health and gambling your life in an accident, let's see what the future will hold for drivers: Rush hour traffic will be longer, if not all day long. Remember, traffic is not only caused by having more vehicles on the road, but because of accidents and break-downs, due to lack of enforcement. Everywhere you go, good luck in finding parking space. Gas prices would obviously be more expensive, even without the fuel tax. Lines will be long, and to top it off, it will probably run out at the pumps all the time.
I don't even know why people want to make driving an issue about the Right versus the Left. So, if the gov't shouldn't be involve in regulations and safety, then we should let everyone, and I mean EVERYONE drive! Let all the hotrods race anywhere they want. Let 80 year olds plow any pedestrians. Who cares about smog! It's high times that Americans start coughing black mucus again!
People may not agree with Comment #5, but it doesn't mean that people are forced NOT to drive because of some left wing conspiracy. Driving should NEVER be a political issue, but for the financial aspect, a balance between cost and convenience. Cities with parking and traffic problems SHOULD tax more and support public transportation for those would can't afford to drive, and those would are not able to drive.
Sheesh!
klaatu @ Mar 29th 2006 8:26PM
Bernie, the rest of the world would live EXACTLY as America does given the opportunity. They prove that every day.
You're fooling yourself if you think they "hate" us because of the amount we drive or whatever other reason you or anyone else could come up with.
The reason many non-Americans "claim" to hate America is because the elitist lefties essentially rule the world outside of America (though they seem to rule the world on the left and right coasts pretty well IN the US too) and "tell" the people of the rest of the world what to think via their state-owned mass media. Look at the BBC some time and you'll see a little of what I mean. The lefties hate the US because we actually (once had) a culture based upon freeom, equality and law derived from the ultimate law of God as seen by Judeo-Christian civilization. And it has been the most successful 250 or so years of any civilization on earth, bar none.
What I'm trying to say is people who are ENVIOUS are liable to hate for no other reason that that.
In addition to that, there is the world of (Insane) Islam where people are taught from birth, the religion of "pieces" (as in blowing up everyone who does not agree exactly as you do) and controlled by their own "elite" mullahs.
The bottom line is this: look at a documentary about communist China or India and you'll see people aspiring to live JUST LIKE YOU AND I DO. Like, homes, electronics, good roads, services, money, opportunities for our future, CARS.
So, get a grip you all lefties and stop being so self-loathing. Stop peeing in the pool for the rest of us.
Brian @ Mar 29th 2006 8:35PM
I question the true usefulness of these numbers. For most people the only real variation is the car they drive. For most people their commute is a constant. Thus I think the most important measure is the per-mile cost of fuel.
I have been collecting real-world costs for a while now and providing a service for people to track their own real costs. Check out the link for my name to see how different various vehicles really are.
Brian @ Mar 29th 2006 8:48PM
Just for the record - public transportation actually being "public" is a relatively new concept and in fact in many places in the world a significant portion of what most of us view as public transportation is really privately owned and operated.
You can say that we should try living without public transportation and seeing what happens. Well, we already did. And what happens is that entrepreneurs build transportation systems for those that don't or can't drive.
It's not simply taxation that influences transportation decisions. Many people choose large vehicles. Many people choose small vehicles. Many people choose no vehicles.
max @ Mar 29th 2006 11:10PM
Klaatu....
Wow!
You said it perfectly.
Frank @ Mar 30th 2006 7:56AM
#8 Charles S.:
"Let's say that we do live in a fantasy world where we encourage everyone to own a car and drive"
We do - it's called the United States of America.
Charles, if you hate automobiles so much, why are you posting on a blog about automobiles?
Richard Warren @ Mar 30th 2006 9:31AM
Shhhhhhhhhhhh!
If the govenment believes these figures, we get higher reimbursment for mileage claimed on taxes, keep talking about how crazy they are and we stay where we are.
Gail @ May 21st 2006 4:05PM
I have a 1994 Ford Ranger that has over 500k miles, have had no major problems, just replacing brakes, tires, regural things that wear out with this many miles, I was told that some motor companies will sometimes use vechiles like this as adervtisements, Does anyone know if there is any truth to this?