What's your SUV worth?

[pscot]

A young woman I know of bought a large Ford SUV about a year ago. She paid upwards of $30,000 for it. Now, beset by high gas prices, she has decided she needs a more fuel-efficient vehicle. She went back to her Ford dealer and asked what her year-old SUV would be worth as a trade-in. They offered her $7000. Apparently you lose 25-gand when you drive it off the lot.

[Lost-in-FL]

1. Some dealers in FL aren't taking Van's or Minivans as trade ins anymore

you just need to look at the used cars lots and they are full of SUV's and mini vans.

[U4ikLefty]

2. Good...let reality bite those gas-hogs on the ass.

[Lost-in-FL]

3. That's the way I see it.

More parking, more people walking, don't need to worry much about kids opening an suv door wide open to scratch or bump my car, cleaner air, less fatal accidents, etc., etc.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. That's true here too

I drive by several lots on my way to and from work. I'd guess that 90% of the cars on those lots are vans and SUVs.

[L0oniX]

23. My 99 Dodge Caravan with 2.4L engine gets 26 mpg on trips. I'm totally happy with it.

[SmileyRose]

37. My dad has a 94 extra long Town & Country (same car)

They got it because folding the 2nd and 3rd seats down makes a full sized bed for camping. He ordered his with all the right stuff so he could put the hitch on it to drag along the boat or the pop up camper. That thing just last summer (car was 12 yrs old) loaded down in tow, all the way from Georgia to California and back, even through the Rockies, averaged 26 MPG.

Why car makers can't do that with a new car now with all that function is a crime.

[Tesha]

42. Because aggressive SUV marketing campaigns turned minivans from useful vehicles into "woman wagons".

Clearly, if a man drives one, it's proof he has no balls. (Mr. Tesha
seems to prove otherwise, though.)

Tesha

[michreject]

53. My 07 Chevy Silverado 3/4 ton 4X4 gets 10 mpg

11.5 on the freeway.

I gotta keep it though. Nothing else will pull my travel trailer. I just have to live with it.

[RayOfHope]

63. Man. My 05 Town and Country only gets 18 in town, 22 on highway.

I'd get something else if I had a longer commute (2 miles) and it wasn't paid for.

[SoCalDem]

70. Our Amanti only gets 11.5..but we knew it was no an economy car

and we only fill up about once a month normally

[tanyev]

4. Market correction.

[nancyr]

5. I don't have much sympathy for people stuck with an SUV.

I never understood the rationale behind buying one in the first place.

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. My son has a friend who has 4 kids

She can't fit all those car seats in a smaller car.

[alarimer]

31. A minivan gets better mileage than an SUV and can hold 7 people.

Or a bunch of car seats.

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. She gets pretty good mileage

and can't really afford a new car.

[mdmc]

41. sounds like she really likes her suv and doesn't want to trade it in

good gas mileage, all the kids fit in it.

[SmileyRose]

11. I understand it just fine. I own one and I'm happy with it.

Remember when minivans first started? Grand Caravan revolutionized automaking. No more stationwagons. Young parents had something hip and new and wonderful. Then the man of the house found out you can't put a trailer hitch on a minivan like you could a station wagon.

so along comes the SUV. My opinion is Jeep Cherokee was first, but Explorer is what spread like the herpes. It can do everything the minivan can do, hauling a passle of kids and all their goop AND haul the boat, the camper or the trailer. And the gas mileage was not that far off from minivans and large family sedans. The original version of Explorer was to die for if someone has an outdoorsy family or for someone who lives way off on a dirt road, or ends up wanting to drive on such. Granted during the 9to5 week they graced pavement - but people don't buy 4 cars, one for each task. They buy the car with all the features they'll ever need it for and max it out on ability when they need to.

then the RV's and boats got bigger. And the SUV's got bigger.

Very few people spend $30-$40,000 on a car out of "status" - most Americans aren't that fortunate. They buy first for whatever function is the most and then for looks and style. The Auto industry has to figure out how to get people that SUV function in a more fuel sipping and affordable package.

My SUV hauls 8 people - not every single day - but at least weekly. It also hauls furniture, plants, home improvement goop etc. It means a lot to me that I can get my own family, plus my elderly parents, plus all the stuff for the beach, and take one car so my Dad doesn't have to drive anymore. He can get in and out of my SUV, but every time he tries to get in and out of the back of a minivan he nearly falls. So we stick him in the front with the driver. But dear Dad just thinks he should be sitting next to his lovely wife and me and the husband should do the same.

My SUV averages 18-22 without the pop up camper and 15-20 with it. I have no intention of trading it in unless something that will give me the same function with such better gas mileage at an affordable price comes along to make economic sense to trade in.


I did the math. If I keep this paid off SUV for the next 7 years - and I started with $4 gas in 2008 and went up 80 cents per year - add in the maintenance costs - This SUV will cost me 87 cents a mile per person. If I trade to a Prius, add the cost of the trading, gas at the same prices, maintenance, and the fact we'll weekly be taking 2 cars instead of just one so the additional cost for that car on those trips only - Over the next 7 years I will spend 1.84 per mile per person with most of the cost being the cost of the vehicle itself and the costs associated with a 2nd car on a regular basis.


Edit - sorry for the typo - the SUV will cost me 87 per mile per person, not 57 as posted. It was a typo

[cobalt1999]

13. Good response.

I have my SUV for camping, hauling the dogs, and pulling the boat. I also have a Harley that I ride when doing trips myself. Between the two, my cost per mile is minimal.

[stevedeshazer]

22. I put a trailer hitch on my Grand Caravan

Towed a trailer 5000 miles with no problem. Got 23 MPG back when we had $2 gas.

[L0oniX]

24. Same here but I added a transmission cooler which is a must have for towing.

[michreject]

54. What was the weight of the trailer?

It couldn't have been too heavy.

[EOTE]

51. Jeep Cherokee the first SUV??!??

What about the Jeep Wagoneer and the Willy's Jeep Wagon just to stay with the Jeep name. Then how about the Toyota Landcruiser, the Chevy Blazer, the Ford Bronco and the Range Rover? The Jeep Cherokee itself evolved from other Jeep SUVs.

[cherokeeprogressive]

60. How about a 1936 Chevy Suburban?

A station wagon on a truck chassis.

[Submariner]

15. The rationale is only if you need 4 wheel drive

Otherwise it is a waste of hardware. I have an SUV, but only because I bought it for it's intended purpose, it's 4 WD capability. It not used as a commuter vehicle.

[Maine-ah]

19. ditto that

now we also have a kid. But we're down to one dog. I'd love to see a Prius try to get out of my drive and my unplowed roads in the winter. I also only drive 7 miles to work. Grocery store is about 8. I do consolidate my errands now though. I owe 7k on my vehicle. 2001 Nissan Xterra. 80k miles, and I have only had to do basic maintenance on it. Never had any problems

[ljm2002]

27. I have a mini-SUV...

...a 2002 KIA Sportage, and I love it. It gets 24 city / 31 highway, so it's better than a lot of sedans in that regard. And it has two 4WD settings, high and low, and was the last year that this model was built on a truck chassis.

Since I like to go off-road sometimes for taking photos, it's perfect for me. It is not that roomy, however: it seats 4 comfortably and 5 tolerably, with seat belts for all 5 so that's a good thing. And a storage area in back that's just big enough for a few pieces of luggage or a large grocery trip's worth of groceries.

I must admit, I too scoff at the Escalades and Tahoes and Humvees, etc., that people drive around here. So sue me. :-)

[SmileyRose]

36. The Ginormous thing bothers me too.

Even the Explorer just keeps getting bigger and quite frankly the size does not make it more useful. My Explorer is a 1996. A neighbor bought a 2nd hand 2006 model at the end of 2007 and I can't believe the difference in size - and we can do everything in mine that he can, excepting mine doesn't have the optional 3rd pop up seat. I had thought of replacing mine with Freestyle - a car based crossover, but it actually gets WORSE mileage than my 12 yr old Explorer. Escape has almost no cargo space - it's got about the same space as a Focus wagon. The only good thing I see in Escape is off road and with the hybrid half decent MPG.

Anyways, for all the crabbing about SUV's. I'd really like to find what functions like mine - with the 3rd seat that pops down for cargo. I am pretty short and sitting up a little higher helps quite a lot driving. It's very frustrating to me that everything offered on the market to do what I need out of a vehicle is either way too big, way too small, and nearly all of them Gas Guzzlers.

I could just beat the Ford Motor Company to a pulp.

[Clark2008]

47. I love my Ford

But I had the good sense to stick with a Mustang and never bought an SUV.

[Bettie]

46. We tow a trailer on a fairly regular basis....

So, we have a Durango (last one built on a truck frame) so that we can carry the kids and tow the trailer.

The vehicle we drive most of the time is a Honda Civic hybrid, but sometimes I need to go somewhere with the kids while my husband is at work and we need to take the Durango and it sucks (and always has), but we accept the trade off for having the capacity to carry seven people when necessary and a trailer when we need it.

Oh, and its paid off.

Just to note that its not always a vanity decision, there are practical reasons to have a larger vehicle.

We're planning on getting a second hybrid for me when we pay off the current one. We just can't swing another car payment right now.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

50. I need an SUV to haul my boat around.

j/k

[carlyhippy]

67. I just bought a brand new Xterra less than 2 weeks ago

I don't drive alot of miles every week. We had a small car at one time, and it was a horrible experience, trying to pack suitcases to go on a trip, driving on that long trip with our kids sitting almost on top of each other and our knees in the dashboard, then the winter hit, -20 with ice, spinning at a standstill at every red light...with other SUV's skidding on the ice towards my little car, no thanks, I will keep my SUV especially for the winter.

[H2O Man]

71. I have an SUV.

In 2001, I was seriously injured when a fellow busy chatting on his cell phone ran two stop signs and a red light, hitting my vehicle at 55 mph. My vehicle then hit a third vehicle. After extensive surgery and physical rehab, I can walk around most days. But driving is difficult. The doctors I saw told my wife and I that with my physical condition, I would need an SUV (or truck). I do not drive much; some weeks 20-50 miles, most weeks less or none. My vehicle gets good gas mileage. In a sense, I am "stuck" with it if I want to be able to drive. But I do not need anyone's sympathy.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. I got rid of mine at just the right time

Actually it was totaled. But it couldn't have happened at a better time.

[Lost-in-FL]

9. That's a scary way to get rid of a car.

:scared: Hope you/your family is ok!

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. Yes we are all fine

It was pretty stressful but it got me into a much more fuel efficient vehicle.

[A HERETIC I AM]

12. An example of spending thousands to save hundreds

The market for those larger vehicles is in the process of falling through the floor.

I used to haul cars and visited some rather large auction yards back then. Some of them cover hundreds of acres. I'd be very interested to see what the inventory of used Expeditions, Navigators, Excursions and Suburbans is these days.

Pretty soon, you'll be able to buy a 2 year old vehicle that retailed for $50,000 for $5,000.

[cobalt1999]

14. I'd also recommend buying one of those Expeditions, Excursions, etc.

Someone will be able to pick a nice vehicle at a huge discount that will cover the cost of the extra fuel.

I really wonder about people trading in a paid off SUV for a new Hybrid. WTF? How will that ever make financial sense?

[Tesha]

21. Some people have concerns broader than their immediate financial gain.

Burning less fuel is a virtue.

Tesha

[A HERETIC I AM]

25. If you can afford it, that's fine.

That's the problem with Hybrids, though.

They sell at such a premium to a comparable non-hybrid, that it takes years for the fuel efficiency to pay off.

[lectrobyte]

28. What's all this "payoff" business? What's the "payoff" on getting

4x4, or leather seats, or DVD players for the kids? I never quite understand this whole idea of "payoff" wrt vehicle purchases.

[cobalt1999]

32. You have to assume all things being equal except fuel economy

Assuming both your old and new vehicle have leather seats, DVD players, etc. What doesn't make sense is someone trading in the old vehicle for a new one just because of gas prices.

They are using an invalid economic argument, that's all. The fuel savings will not pay for the increase in the vehicle cost/payments, insurance, etc. Therefore, it's the more expense choice or doesn't "payoff".

[lectrobyte]

35. I'd sort of agree with, but buying a car, even something like a

Honda Insight is an emotional decision. Folks like big SUVs because the feel "safe", sports cars because they feel "muy macho" etc. Why can't something like a Prius be justified because you want to put less carbon in the air, or you remember the 1970's when there was a 5 gallon purchase limit when you could find gas at all? Just sayin'.

[cobalt1999]

26. All the more reason not to buy a new car.

It takes more energy to build a new car than that car will use in fuel during it's life. If you are true to your "virtue", then you'd definitely buy a used SUV over a new Hybrid and save money while doing it.

Win - Win.

[SmileyRose]

38. This is a VERY funny post.

And probably true. LOL :)

[Tesha]

40. You know, I think we'll need to see some citations on that claim.

These citations must, of course, consider the fact that some of
the embodied energy in the vehicle is recovered when the vehicle
is later recycled. The steel, for example, doesn't "go away", it gets
re-used to make other steel. And the nickel in the NiMH battery
(that so many people love to claim is the Prius's energy downfall)
is almost entirely recovered and made into new NiMH batteries
for more Priuses.

Tesha

[Robb]

45. "Later recycled" actualy covers it

No matter how much of a new vehicle will eventually be recycled, from a zero-sum perspective you'll never beat using something already built. :shrug:

In fact, the bigger the already-existing vehicle being used, the better; less to fill a landfill if it's being used.

I've had my old Explorer for going on nine years, it's paid for, and if you lived where I do, you'd be surprised I don't own a tank to get around. ;) I've looked into Prii, but can't justify the expense -- and, to the other post, I can't justify just dumping the old truck.

Now, that said, if the goal is using less gasoline, there's no way to beat a new low-mpg vehicle. But the broader picture doesn't support it from a strict sustainability perspective. When the old cars no longer run, all things being equal, it makes sense to recycle what you can from them and raise chickens in the rest -- and then get something that gets better mileage. :)

[Tesha]

48. That statement is ludicrous.

> No matter how much of a new vehicle will eventually be recycled, from a
> zero-sum perspective you'll never beat using something already built.

That statement is ludicrous. If we have car A (with its construction fully
amortized) but it gets, say, 10 MPG, and new Car B that gets 60 MPG but
hasn't yet amortized any of its "construction energy", there's *STILL*
some time in the future when car B will break even with Car A, and
from that point onwards, there's a definite payback for having switched
from Car A to Car B.

And as I said and you mostly ignored, most of the energy embodied
in Car A is recoverable when it is recycled. The steel, aluminum, glass,
lead, nickel, and some other materials are very recyclable into new
material at a much lower expenditure of energy than to produce
these materials from their ores.

Tesha

[Robb]

49. Not at all

Working backwards:

- Recycling ore is a much higher energy expenditure than mining it. Period. You can argue other costs, social or environmental, but not energy.

- The old car requires, let's say, 100 random units of energy (REUs) to produce. The new car requires, let's say, 70 REUs to build. Amortizing isn't the issue; it's that you still have two vehicles produced, for a total of 170 REUs. You can't ignore the original 100, it's already left the barn. You've scrapped the old car, and you won't get anything near its original REUs back when you recycle it. Smelters do not run on love.

Now, that said, there *will* be a time when the 170 REUs will be "recovered," but by way of comparison consider that tank of gas as being a tiny fraction of a single REU. It will be a long, long time.

The solution is, you're correct, Car B. But if your only concern is REUs, you've got to run Car A into the ground first -- energy use for parts and labor will catch up, and your equation will make more sense as it gets older and older.

Better still, never even purchase Car A. Unfortunately a lot of people did.

[Tesha]

56. You're nuts; there's no point in further debate.

> Recycling ore is a much higher energy expenditure than mining it.

You're nuts; there's no point in further debate.

Tesha

[Robb]

65. There is, it seems, point in your researching further

Read a book perhaps on the subject published since 1990. Things are not what we thought they might be then.

With the notable exception of aluminum -- and there specifically now only cans, or other non-sorting processes -- the mining process uses less energy per pound to produce nearly every metal. Dramatically so with larger operations. This even includes steel, which it hasn't always, but rising transportation costs have affected every portion of the metals reclamation industry -- and due to economies of scale, that industry suffers far more than raw materials giants who mine bauxite, for example, on massive scale in Australia and China.

Sadly enough I live in mining country, and it is indeed so. It would not necessarily be the case, were there a nationalized reclamation industry, for example, or a market willing to support fewer, larger metals reclamation facilities.

"Recycled" metals are a commodity like any other. Until other costs -- environmental, social, or what have you -- are factored in, I do not see this changing.

Recognizing the social factor, most municipalities, such as my own, bear the cost of curbside recycling because there is no money in it for those who pick up unsorted materials -- the only kind which consumers have accepted broadly. In some cases, such as in my town, the recycling program is negotiated as part of the waste management contract for the entire town -- you want the gig to pick up our trash, you provide us with little blue tubs for recycling. But make no mistake, the cost for it is factored into the bidding process.

[cobalt1999]

55. Robb covered most of it but here's a good article..

Ditching your gas guzzler is a great way to reduce your carbon footprint, but if you really want to do something about global warming, get a used car. You'll be putting less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

As Matt Power notes in this month's issue of Wired, hybrids get great gas mileage but it takes 113 million BTUs of energy to make a Toyota Prius. Because there are about 113,000 BTUs of energy in a gallon of gasoline, the Prius has consumed the equivalent of 1,000 gallons of gasoline before it reaches the showroom. Think of it as a carbon debt -- one you won't pay off until the Prius has turned over 46,000 miles or so.

Buy a used 1998 Toyota Tercel that gets 27 mpg city / 35 mpg highway miles. The Prius will have to go 100,000 miles to achieve the same carbon savings as the 10-year-old Tercel.

blog.wired.com/cars/2008/05/the-ultimate-pr.html


Bottom line: If you really are concerned about saving energy, you'd do everything possible to avoid that 1000 gallons of gasoline it takes to build a new car.

[Tesha]

57. But it will, of course.

> Buy a used 1998 Toyota Tercel that gets 27 mpg city / 35 mpg highway miles.
> The Prius will have to go 100,000 miles to achieve the same carbon savings as
> the 10-year-old Tercel.

But it will, of course. ;) And much more, and after 100K miles,
you're on the winning side of the equation.

Tesha

[cobalt1999]

61. as long as you hold on for the long-term

"after 100K miles,you're on the winning side of the equation."

Most people don't hold their cars for long past 100K miles though, so they never get to the "winning side". Too many will see the next generation hybrid come out and trade in for that after only 50,000 miles and think they are being good to the environment.

[Tesha]

62. If their old hybrid remains "in circulation", that's no problem.

It doesn't matter if the original owner retains it or not; as long
as *THAT CAR* runs to the several hundred thousand miles that
so many Toyotas do, then society retains the benefit of that
vehicle.

By the way, I'm one of those people who routinely run cars
(not Toyotas though) to 200K miles or so. Our Dodge Caravan
is somewhere north of 170K right now and the youngster in
our stable is an Audi with about 75K miles on it.

Tesha

[cobalt1999]

64. Only if the person buying the old hybrid would otherwise buy a new car.

If the used hybrid car buyer instead buys another used car, then the original hybrid owner is creating additional demand for 1 new car.

It's the demand for new cars that incurs the cost. Less demand for new cars, coupled more reuse of existing older (though less fuel efficient)cars is actually greener than lots of demand for brand new hybrids.

I too run my cars into the ground. Our Volvo has well over 150K and my Ford Bronco has over 100K. Neither will be replaced until absolutely necessary. Hopefully by then, we'll be on fully electric or 4th generation hybrids.

[carlyhippy]

68. I couldn't afford a hybrid SUV so I got a regular one

I couldn't justify the 5,000 extra over the next 6 years savings in fuel, it wouldn't add up, I don't drive that much anyway.

[pansypoo53219]

16. buying new is just ridiculous if you think about it.

my brother says warranty blah blah blah.
i say-low miles used baby. heck, in the late 80's-90's, i had nixon era oldsmobiles, but both bought under 70k.
my 1 uncle + aunt trade in when they need an oil change. i think they are addicted to new car smell. blegh.

[jackster]

17. I just totaled my car

and I'm car shopping

Locally I'm finding PAGES AND PAGES of SUVs, trucks, quite a few minivans and LOTS of Chrysler cars!

[lectrobyte]

18. Don't quite get the logic. A year ago, gas was $3 / gallon, and

assuming the SUV gets 15 MPG and they drive 12,000 miles a year, roughly 800 gallons more or less, that's still around $2400 in gas per year, or $200/month. Now the extra $67/month (or $800 year, however you want to look at it) for $4 gas is making them trade it in? I'd argue they shouldn't have bought it in the first place if their budget is that tight.

[SmileyRose]

20. yes and the same driving at 25mpg

is going to save them about $1280 a year tops in gas over the SUV they have right now at $4 a gallon.

[Terry in Austin]

29. Wanna get that Lincoln Compensator off your hands?

Well, okay... I'll take five hundred bucks.

[kcass1954]

30. She may be getting low-balled.

I think he doesn't want to take it in on trade, but doesn't want to tell her that. I work at an auto auction in Florida, coincidentally on the Ford account. Wholesale prices here are a little more than double that for 2007 Expeditions, and a little less than double for 2007 Explorers. I've heard that there are dealers not taking them in on trade, but don't know of anyone who admits to that right now.

[lutefisk]

33. Exactly. If she bites, the dealer makes a great profit even sending it to auction.

Car dealers make more money from some deals than others. People would be surprised how much dealers can make from their trade-in.

[Imagevision]

39. Soon the US. will look like Europe, nothing but tiny cars that get 40+ mpg.

[Art_from_Ark]

44. I for one wouldn't mind that one bit

Better gas mileage, plus smaller cars (except for some muscle cars) tend to encourage better driving manners.

[Fumesucker]

43. I inherited a 97 Expedition, 5.7, towing package, dual AC, realtime mpg readout..

If I use some basic hypermiling techniques I can get about 17 mpg city and I get a consistent 22 mpg on the hwy at 65 mph (going slower doesn't help and going 70 drops it to 21 mpg).

I have to say that the realtime mpg readout has really changed the way I drive, it's most illuminating to see the benefits of coasting everywhere it's possible to do so, when I first started driving the Expedition I got 11.5 mpg city average. Pulse and glide gets me the best mileage in the city and on hilly highways.

Since I have need to pull large trailer loads from time to time the Expedition makes more sense to me to keep than to sell for the $1,000 or so I could get for it. I took two junk cars to the recycler last week on my big trailer and made $550. I also hauled a project truck for someone 73 miles and got 18 mpg @ 55 mph with a total vehicle weight of over 9,000 lb. Even with my big dual axle flatbed trailer I still get 20 mpg @ 55 mph when the trailer is unloaded.

When I don't need the weather protection or carrying capacity I ride my GS850 Suzuki @ 45 mpg. Since I have a cold weather riding suit I can ride for ten months a year in fair comfort.

All together I average around 35 mpg if you count the the SUV and the bike.

[madokie]

52. next winter when the snow and ice hits ours will be priceless to us

its been paid for for several years now and its still a good vehicle so it won't be sold anytime soon. When we update to a better mileage auto the explorer will be put out in the back where it'll have life easier until the all wheel drive is needed.

[Blue Belle]

58. If her $30,000 SUV is is worth only $7000 on trade in after a year...

Then my '96 Ford Explorer that has been wrecked, leaks power steering fluid, and suck gas like a seive is worth about $.50.

[Stinky The Clown]

59. I have a 2000 Isuzu Rodeo. It is worth $40,0000 and it is for sale. Wanna buy it?

[CRF450]

66. My truck is worth around $15,000 from the $30k when it was brand new in 04

When I'm not using it for work I take the car.

[carlyhippy]

69. had she wanted to trade in on a Lincoln or high priced vehicle the $$ would have been more

was she trying to buy a smaller cheaper car? I went thru that with a car once; I had bought an escort and quickly found out it was waaay too small for us for a family car, so we tried to trade it in on another type of larger car, which was cheaper, the dealer wouldn't give us hardly anything. When we traded it in on a van, we got payoff and 1,000 more, it depends on the dealer and how much they wanna work with her.
Carly