Re: Update Re: Carfax, Buying Used, & Craigslist.org

Pszemol wrote:
> "AZ Nomad" <aznomad.3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:slrng7n6j1.qgb.aznomad.3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:51:06 -0500, Pszemol <Pszemol@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> "AZ Nomad" <aznomad.3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:slrng7mst1.ejm.aznomad.3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:28:41 -0700, Elle 
>>>> <honda.lioness@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> "Pszemol" <Pszemol@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>>>>>> Lets say you compare a car making 30mpg to a car making 35mpg.
>>>>>> 12000/30 is 400 gallons. 12000/35 is 343 gallons. Difference
>>>>>> is 57 gallons. With todays price less than $5 per gallons it
>>>>>> is 57*5 = 285 dollars PER YEAR. 23 dollars per month...
>>>>
>>>>> ~$20/month is something a lot of people do mind. That's a nice 
>>>>> lunch somewhere once a month. There's no point in paying it, if it 
>>>>> can be avoided. Twenty bucks here, twenty there each month adds up. 
>>>>
>>>> Save it all up and you might be able to afford a new battery when 
>>>> the time
>>>> comes.  The payback period for most hybrids is greater than the life 
>>>> of the
>>>> car.  You'll have more money in your pocket if you simply get a 
>>>> standard
>>>> car.  Better yet, get a one year old standard engine car.  The 
>>>> difference
>>>> in cost will be more like $150/month.
>>
>>> And when buying an old car you really does not have a way testing
>>> how good is this particular car on mpg. It might require some
>>> money spent to get to the desired target mpg values - if it costs
>>> couple hundreds to replace sensors or make some tuning up than
>>> it again defeats the purpose of saving these 5-10 bucks a month
>>> which the mileage improvement can save you. Tricky subject... :-)
>>
>>> Also - with an old car, a single expensive unexpected repair can
>>> kill all your pre-calculated "profits" you expect, so choosing
>>> right car is extra tricky and is more in the hands of luck/fate.
>>
>> I was talking about a year old car, not a twenty old junker.
> 
> I know :-) You were talknig about one year old... :-)))
> But we were talking here in this thread about the sense in
> making mpg comparisons when buying almost 20 years old junker
> (93 civic).

1. 2008 - 1993 = 15.  see my earlier comment about your math.

2. you don't seem to understand that modern cars are much heavier than 
the older ones, and thus, because the extra weight takes more energy to 
move around, many modern cars lose their fuel efficiency advantage 
compared to older ones.  or at least, older hondas.  a literally 20 year 
old crx hf can out-perform the current civic hybrid by some margin in 
fuel economy ratings.