running two cars, is it worth it?
Discussion
RobM77 said:
If I could go back in time and tell my 17 year old self anything about cars that would save money and hassle, it would be that there is no one car that does everything. There can be (McLaren F1), but manufacturers don't tend to make them. This is where the whole "£100k garage" thing comes in: most of us would choose a track car, a sports car, a GT car and a practical daily driver in preference to one £100k car that supposedly does everything. Even combining a sports car and track car leads to compromises for both (something I've messed with in particular, as these are the two types of car I lust after the most). My younger self wasn't really aware of that, but it's something I've learnt over the years and consequently my multi car choices have become more specialised at what they do, leading to me becoming happier with the cars I own as a result.
Reminded me of a thread a while back - I don't do 100K garages - I do 10K garagesB'stard Child said:
RobM77 said:
If I could go back in time and tell my 17 year old self anything about cars that would save money and hassle, it would be that there is no one car that does everything. There can be (McLaren F1), but manufacturers don't tend to make them. This is where the whole "£100k garage" thing comes in: most of us would choose a track car, a sports car, a GT car and a practical daily driver in preference to one £100k car that supposedly does everything. Even combining a sports car and track car leads to compromises for both (something I've messed with in particular, as these are the two types of car I lust after the most). My younger self wasn't really aware of that, but it's something I've learnt over the years and consequently my multi car choices have become more specialised at what they do, leading to me becoming happier with the cars I own as a result.
Reminded me of a thread a while back - I don't do 100K garages - I do 10K garages
Same principle, lower budget. 
My 2-Eleven was a good example. I thought it would be the perfect car for sunny day blats with my Caterham owning friends and for track days a few times a year, whereas it was actually very compromised on both track and road. On the road it never felt like it was doing more than 30mph due to its capabilities being so high, and it was very noisy and uncomfortable, with completely unnecessary and irrelevant performance for a public road; whereas on track, although it blitzed everything in sight, even on Lotus days, it felt big and tail heavy compared to a single seater like I was used to. For what it cost I'd be far happier with a Formula Ford and an Elise. In an ideal world I'd have a track car, sports car, GT car, a van and a practical everyday car.
SWoll said:
Not sure why anyone would hand over £18k for a car to cover 50 miles a week and it's almost certain he could have leased the car for less than that depreciation over 3 years without handing over £18K up front and with no worries about disposing of it. As an example a Golf GTD can be leased for <£9K over 3 years and that's a £25k list car. Similar costs for an A4 TFSI that lists at £28K.
B'stard Child said:
RobM77 said:
If I could go back in time and tell my 17 year old self anything about cars that would save money and hassle, it would be that there is no one car that does everything. There can be (McLaren F1), but manufacturers don't tend to make them. This is where the whole "£100k garage" thing comes in: most of us would choose a track car, a sports car, a GT car and a practical daily driver in preference to one £100k car that supposedly does everything. Even combining a sports car and track car leads to compromises for both (something I've messed with in particular, as these are the two types of car I lust after the most). My younger self wasn't really aware of that, but it's something I've learnt over the years and consequently my multi car choices have become more specialised at what they do, leading to me becoming happier with the cars I own as a result.
Reminded me of a thread a while back - I don't do 100K garages - I do 10K garagesSmart Roadster - £3k when bought 4 years ago.
Mercedes 500SL - £4k last year
Mercedes E240 estate - £600 last month.
It depends on what you want to run.
I currently spend £300/month on fuel plus a fair chunk on other running costs and depreciation on a 7 year old M3. 80% of that is commuting.
I *could* lease and run a Skoda Citigo or similar for the commuting part and probably save £100/month.
But why would I want to do that?
I currently spend £300/month on fuel plus a fair chunk on other running costs and depreciation on a 7 year old M3. 80% of that is commuting.
I *could* lease and run a Skoda Citigo or similar for the commuting part and probably save £100/month.
But why would I want to do that?
AshBurrows said:
I keep trying to work out whether or not I'd be better off running a daily along side my stupid car. If I do 10K a year at 15mpg, would something that is still relatively fun, say a renaultsport clio, for ~£5k save me much and how many years til it evened out?
You'd be in profit in just over 3 years assuming no costly maintenance on the Renault and assuming 30mpg from the Renault. 10k miles @15mpg= 666 gallons = 3023 litres. At 1.08/litre thats £3265 per year you spend on fuel.
10k miles @30mpg will be half that so you save ~1600 per year in fuel. Purchase price recouped in 3 years or so and just tax/insurance to complete.
If price of petrol goes up the time shortens.
Edited by lostkiwi on Thursday 29th September 15:07
RobM77 said:
For what it cost I'd be far happier with a Formula Ford and an Elise. In an ideal world I'd have a track car, sports car, GT car, a van and a practical everyday car.
my younger self would have a formula ford, maybe race an historic ff.For the life of me i see very little benefit in owning most 100k+ cars when contrasted to a few days a year on track in a single seater.
though not cheap, FF is way cheaper than any supercar yet 50x times the fun.
toasty said:
It depends on what you want to run.
I currently spend £300/month on fuel plus a fair chunk on other running costs and depreciation on a 7 year old M3. 80% of that is commuting.
I *could* lease and run a Skoda Citigo or similar for the commuting part and probably save £100/month.
But why would I want to do that?
That's not really the point. The alternative would be to have a 7 year old humble BMW of your choice and an Elise, so your dull car is still nicely balanced, comfortable and good to drive, but just not as delectable as the M3. If you're commute's on the motorway or in town, then something like a 320i or 320d is going to offer a very similar experience to the M3 (and to be honest on a lot of twisty roads where you can't really use the performance or lean on the chassis of the M3), and then when you're blatting down a B road at the weekend, or on a track day, the Elise offers more entertainment than the M3. Funnily enough, an M3 is what I'd have if I had to have one car, but instead I choose to split things and it's actually a lot cheaper that way too (see my maths a few pages ago for this very dilemma). Sure, whenever I see an M3 or an M5 I feel lust for it, but I know that splitting things is better for me. This may not of course apply to you, but I was just trying to explain why buying a front wheel drive HOS and a Ferrari is not the usual two car split most people go for.I currently spend £300/month on fuel plus a fair chunk on other running costs and depreciation on a 7 year old M3. 80% of that is commuting.
I *could* lease and run a Skoda Citigo or similar for the commuting part and probably save £100/month.
But why would I want to do that?
I don't drive in the week, so both my cars are weekend toys of varying practicality.
All year I think it's a great idea until this time of year, when both need servicing and MOTing, and one needs taxing and insuring.
The sillier car - which does about 1000 miles a year - just cost about £500 to get through its MOT, plus £235.00 tax and £170 insurance.
So, about £1 a mile on top of fuel.
At least it's not depreciating, in fact it seems to be appreciating by £1000 a year, so what am I complaining about?
All year I think it's a great idea until this time of year, when both need servicing and MOTing, and one needs taxing and insuring.
The sillier car - which does about 1000 miles a year - just cost about £500 to get through its MOT, plus £235.00 tax and £170 insurance.
So, about £1 a mile on top of fuel.
At least it's not depreciating, in fact it seems to be appreciating by £1000 a year, so what am I complaining about?
I run 5 cars (soon to be 6) :-(
It's always going to be cheaper and simpler to run one car!
- Mazda 6 2.2 TD = family car + main commute car
- Fiesta TDCi = wife's car
- Ford Ka 1.2 = daughter's car (she's just passed her test)
- 1990 Mazda Eunos = 16-yr old son's "engineering experience" track day car (he's too young to drive it)
- Fisher Fury R1 = my fun "toy" car, does <2000 miles per year
It's always going to be cheaper and simpler to run one car!
TameRacingDriver said:
If there's one thing I've learned from this thread, its neither whether it's right or wrong to run more than one car, its merely that I'm in the wrong job 
Hence, I run one "decent" car.
I work in a factory depends on how you justify you hobby. If you don't work on your own cars then maintaining more than one is expensive.Hence, I run one "decent" car.
B'stard Child said:
I work in a factory depends on how you justify you hobby. If you don't work on your own cars then maintaining more than one is expensive.
Oh sure I could probably run a couple of cheap cars, but I keep seeing garages full of "exotica" (don't take that too literally, but you know what I mean) in this thread. It doesn't matter how much I justify it, it's not in the slightest affordable! Yes, I am jealous, and yes I would do the same. I can dream... Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff