Why do buyers of £50k cars care about MPG?
Discussion
I think it's more that people are irrational. Think back to when the road tax changed from capacity to co2. You had people paying thousands to knock of a couple of hundred pounds of road tax. It made no sense unless you were keeping the car for 15 years+ but pre-2005 cars still went up in value significantly.
It's not a problem. Once you've identified that people are idiots then just buy what's been irrationally devalued.
It's not a problem. Once you've identified that people are idiots then just buy what's been irrationally devalued.
njw1 said:
At the last place I worked the MD was a millionaire yet always chose the diesel version, apparently he did it for no other reason than to have a greater range.
Exactly.The company van I have can clock up 700 miles between fills.
Even with a company fuel card, I just can't be bothered to fill up.
I try to loan my van out, when it's touching red.
And I give them the fuel card also.
What would make this van better ?
1000 mile range.
BTW, the major uptick in the sales of deisels in Europe in the mid 2000's was primarily because for most people, they were easier to drive and faster, simply because they made a lot more torque than the mostly N/A petrol engines.
Drive say a mk 5 golf tdi (making 350 nm) vs a 2.0 petrol (making about 160 Nm) and the diesel is simply a nice car to drive in the real world, where chasing the red line is frustrating. It's the same reason engine capacities in the US were generally much larger, simply to make the cars nicer to drive.
Same for say an BMW E46, 330i vs 330d. yes the 330i made more power (260 bhp vs 210) but the 450Nm at 1800 rpm meant in the real world the derv was an easier car to drive daily.
Once gasoline direct injection became a thing in about 2008/2009, suddenly you could have a petrol turbo and not have the catasrophically poor economy that previously went hand in hand with boosted highly knock limited low compression petrol engine, Hence there are now just about comparable gasoline turbo engines that have a similarly decent low rpm torque curve, and increasingly, mild hybridisation is allied to these engines to try to maximise economy whilst keeping the cleaner tailpipe emissions and smoother sound of a gasoline engine.
Cars like the BMW 330e now have a 2.0 turbo petrol and hybrid system to try to get the best of both worlds. (unfortunately, the extra friction of the smooth 6 cyl engine sounded it's deathknell here)
Drive say a mk 5 golf tdi (making 350 nm) vs a 2.0 petrol (making about 160 Nm) and the diesel is simply a nice car to drive in the real world, where chasing the red line is frustrating. It's the same reason engine capacities in the US were generally much larger, simply to make the cars nicer to drive.
Same for say an BMW E46, 330i vs 330d. yes the 330i made more power (260 bhp vs 210) but the 450Nm at 1800 rpm meant in the real world the derv was an easier car to drive daily.
Once gasoline direct injection became a thing in about 2008/2009, suddenly you could have a petrol turbo and not have the catasrophically poor economy that previously went hand in hand with boosted highly knock limited low compression petrol engine, Hence there are now just about comparable gasoline turbo engines that have a similarly decent low rpm torque curve, and increasingly, mild hybridisation is allied to these engines to try to maximise economy whilst keeping the cleaner tailpipe emissions and smoother sound of a gasoline engine.
Cars like the BMW 330e now have a 2.0 turbo petrol and hybrid system to try to get the best of both worlds. (unfortunately, the extra friction of the smooth 6 cyl engine sounded it's deathknell here)
Jaguar steve said:
Why?
Because they're the sort of people who've been up all night for two consecutive nights anxiously spreadsheeting absolutely every cost involved in running a car anybody could think of, even down to working out exactly how much every second of use of the screenwashers adds to their annual water bill and how many times a year they could get away with sneaking a 50p piece out of the kids money box for the forecourt air compressor to ensure the tyres are always at the absolute optimum pressure to save a pipette of fuel each week.
Even though they've been nursing a semi between glancing out the window at the empty space on the drive and flicking back and fourth between the Very Shiny Car online configurator and the spreadsheet no matter how they jiggle the numbers the final column tells them they can't quite afford it.
But another spreadsheet tells them if they go without holidays and feed their kids beans on toast for the next three years and flog all their toys on Gumtree they might just be able to scrape into a £50k car with a respectable number of option boxes ticked bracket so they can tell all their friends and workmates.
Decisions. Decisions.
Cool story, but the real answer is generally BIK.Because they're the sort of people who've been up all night for two consecutive nights anxiously spreadsheeting absolutely every cost involved in running a car anybody could think of, even down to working out exactly how much every second of use of the screenwashers adds to their annual water bill and how many times a year they could get away with sneaking a 50p piece out of the kids money box for the forecourt air compressor to ensure the tyres are always at the absolute optimum pressure to save a pipette of fuel each week.
Even though they've been nursing a semi between glancing out the window at the empty space on the drive and flicking back and fourth between the Very Shiny Car online configurator and the spreadsheet no matter how they jiggle the numbers the final column tells them they can't quite afford it.
But another spreadsheet tells them if they go without holidays and feed their kids beans on toast for the next three years and flog all their toys on Gumtree they might just be able to scrape into a £50k car with a respectable number of option boxes ticked bracket so they can tell all their friends and workmates.
Decisions. Decisions.
PH User said:
Murcielago_Boy said:
These cars are all on finance -mostly/many, up to the eyeballs too.
Have you got the data to back that up?I think my Dad firmly comes into this category. He does lots of miles in his daily mainly going back and forth to Switzerland then going to different places using using his house there as a hub. A nicer spec gives him a nicer place to sit but spending more on fuel to cover the same miles on the motorway at the same speed he just sees as pointless. Especially since France tightened up on speeding he has slowed down a lot.
Saying that he was at the LR dealer speccing a Defender V8 as one last stupid car before he forced to go electric. Ironically he is getting rid of the ultimate version of fuel economy his Tesla.
Saying that he was at the LR dealer speccing a Defender V8 as one last stupid car before he forced to go electric. Ironically he is getting rid of the ultimate version of fuel economy his Tesla.
andyalan10 said:
All the above, plus:-
b) Perhaps even if you can afford a £50k car you might still want to minimise your environmental impact.
My parents bought an E250 CDI new. I'm sure they could've afforded to buy & run a six-pot, but they're not interested in driving quickly / for fun, and they are concerned about reducing their carbon emissions.b) Perhaps even if you can afford a £50k car you might still want to minimise your environmental impact.
I've always thought that those who made enough money (let's assume outright purchase rather than PCP/Lease) are savvy enough with their money to not wish to give the Govt loads of their hard-earned in fuel duty.
Those running £50k-ers on PCP may be fully using or even topping up a car allowance, so want to minimise their additional motoring spend over and above what their employer is giving them.
Those running £50k-ers on PCP may be fully using or even topping up a car allowance, so want to minimise their additional motoring spend over and above what their employer is giving them.
Since 2001 , I have had the following;
2001 to 2004, A6 Audi 2.6 I ran from 70 to 150k miles.
2004 to 2005 an e38 BMW 735 that I gran from 50 to 80k miles
2005 to 2011 an e38 BMW 740 that I ran from 78k to 203k miles
2011 to Jan 2020 a BMW 650 that I ran from 48k to 201k.
All of the above fully costed and maintained properly, came in at less than 50% of taking a 5 series company car. A fuel card has assisted.
If people worked out the actuals, I think that fewer would take the default diesel company car.
I understand the range issue, as all the BMW's were circa a 400 mile range, which was a pain. However, the 740 could get pretty close to 600 miles on it's 22 gallon tank, but it seemed wrong to pay £110 to fill the tank back in 2006.
The average mpg over the last 20 years has probably been 25 mpg.
The Audi was functional, but all the BMW's were wonderful.
2001 to 2004, A6 Audi 2.6 I ran from 70 to 150k miles.
2004 to 2005 an e38 BMW 735 that I gran from 50 to 80k miles
2005 to 2011 an e38 BMW 740 that I ran from 78k to 203k miles
2011 to Jan 2020 a BMW 650 that I ran from 48k to 201k.
All of the above fully costed and maintained properly, came in at less than 50% of taking a 5 series company car. A fuel card has assisted.
If people worked out the actuals, I think that fewer would take the default diesel company car.
I understand the range issue, as all the BMW's were circa a 400 mile range, which was a pain. However, the 740 could get pretty close to 600 miles on it's 22 gallon tank, but it seemed wrong to pay £110 to fill the tank back in 2006.
The average mpg over the last 20 years has probably been 25 mpg.
The Audi was functional, but all the BMW's were wonderful.
Register1 said:
njw1 said:
At the last place I worked the MD was a millionaire yet always chose the diesel version, apparently he did it for no other reason than to have a greater range.
Exactly.The company van I have can clock up 700 miles between fills.
Even with a company fuel card, I just can't be bothered to fill up.
I try to loan my van out, when it's touching red.
And I give them the fuel card also.
What would make this van better ?
1000 mile range.
The OPs question comes from the same place that a lot of these threads do - People often forget that their own use case is not the only one. If you generally do 100 miles a week and you rarely venture more than 100 miles from home, then tank range is unlikely to be a big consideration. It's related to that old chestnut of "why do cups have stereos and cruise control and cupholders because I drive my car not the computer plus I don't drink in my car it's a car so I drive it and listen to the engine and not the stereo", which attracts answers of "I take my car on long trips and all these things are useful when I do that".
If you are a travelling worker then a 1,000 mile range means you can get through your working week without having to stop for fuel when you might be unsure if you have the time (in the mornings) or too tired (in the evenings). The comfy seats mean you stave off back-ache for longer, and you really don't need the car to be particularly fast or to handle well.
Likewise if you are someone who takes trips to visit friends or a second home, a 1,000 mile range might mean you can get there and back without feeling like you're being ripped off on fuel, or it might simply mean your "where should I stop?" criteria switch from "where can I get the right flavour of petrol for my car" to "should I eat at that fantastic restaurant we found on the last trip?"
We're quite fortunate that a lot of cars these days have performance that is pretty quick AND economical. You can buy luxurious cars with a 3.0 diesel that will do 0-62mph in under 5 seconds, 155mph limited top-speed, and cruising on the motorway will return somewhere around 50mpg meaning 750+ miles between fill-ups.
Max_Torque said:
BTW, the major uptick in the sales of deisels in Europe in the mid 2000's was primarily because for most people, they were easier to drive and faster, simply because they made a lot more torque than the mostly N/A petrol engines.
TBF the big bonus in the UK was in much cheaper BIK, cheaper RFL and HMRC mileage rates for business use that might actually cover the fuel cost! I bought an E46 320td Compact based on that set of circumstances in 2005 but some years later had an E46 325ti Compact that was a much better car to drive in every way, as well as being way quicker - and realised what I had missed.
My diesel had a very limited rev range. If you tried to join a roundabout at 10mph in 2nd it would want to stall, but then it would get breathless after 4,000rpm.
But it could do over 600 miles on one tank!
Still much preferred my 325ti as it could do anything from 600 to 6,000rpm faultlessy, even if a tank only managed 450 miles.
But these weren't £50K cars - at that budget why should economy be an issue? If economy is an issue can £50K actually be within budget, or is this more PCP wannabe?
donkmeister said:
I agree, and I think it's quite compelling to the tank-range argument that Mercedes (and I think BMW) have long offered larger fuel tank options for some of the larger but more economical models. If you bought a big-engined model you got the big tank as standard but when coupled with a more economical engine you get massive range. Even now, the lower-powered C-classes come with a 40-ish litre fuel tank but can be spec'd with a 65-ish litre fuel tank.
The OPs question comes from the same place that a lot of these threads do - People often forget that their own use case is not the only one. If you generally do 100 miles a week and you rarely venture more than 100 miles from home, then tank range is unlikely to be a big consideration. It's related to that old chestnut of "why do cups have stereos and cruise control and cupholders because I drive my car not the computer plus I don't drink in my car it's a car so I drive it and listen to the engine and not the stereo", which attracts answers of "I take my car on long trips and all these things are useful when I do that".
If you are a travelling worker then a 1,000 mile range means you can get through your working week without having to stop for fuel when you might be unsure if you have the time (in the mornings) or too tired (in the evenings). The comfy seats mean you stave off back-ache for longer, and you really don't need the car to be particularly fast or to handle well.
Likewise if you are someone who takes trips to visit friends or a second home, a 1,000 mile range might mean you can get there and back without feeling like you're being ripped off on fuel, or it might simply mean your "where should I stop?" criteria switch from "where can I get the right flavour of petrol for my car" to "should I eat at that fantastic restaurant we found on the last trip?"
We're quite fortunate that a lot of cars these days have performance that is pretty quick AND economical. You can buy luxurious cars with a 3.0 diesel that will do 0-62mph in under 5 seconds, 155mph limited top-speed, and cruising on the motorway will return somewhere around 50mpg meaning 750+ miles between fill-ups.
We had a C Class with the larger tank, I think it was a £100 option iirc The OPs question comes from the same place that a lot of these threads do - People often forget that their own use case is not the only one. If you generally do 100 miles a week and you rarely venture more than 100 miles from home, then tank range is unlikely to be a big consideration. It's related to that old chestnut of "why do cups have stereos and cruise control and cupholders because I drive my car not the computer plus I don't drink in my car it's a car so I drive it and listen to the engine and not the stereo", which attracts answers of "I take my car on long trips and all these things are useful when I do that".
If you are a travelling worker then a 1,000 mile range means you can get through your working week without having to stop for fuel when you might be unsure if you have the time (in the mornings) or too tired (in the evenings). The comfy seats mean you stave off back-ache for longer, and you really don't need the car to be particularly fast or to handle well.
Likewise if you are someone who takes trips to visit friends or a second home, a 1,000 mile range might mean you can get there and back without feeling like you're being ripped off on fuel, or it might simply mean your "where should I stop?" criteria switch from "where can I get the right flavour of petrol for my car" to "should I eat at that fantastic restaurant we found on the last trip?"
We're quite fortunate that a lot of cars these days have performance that is pretty quick AND economical. You can buy luxurious cars with a 3.0 diesel that will do 0-62mph in under 5 seconds, 155mph limited top-speed, and cruising on the motorway will return somewhere around 50mpg meaning 750+ miles between fill-ups.
It was a C220d and would easily do over 1000 miles between fills
Well worth it as we did around 120k in it over three years
Mr Tidy said:
Max_Torque said:
BTW, the major uptick in the sales of deisels in Europe in the mid 2000's was primarily because for most people, they were easier to drive and faster, simply because they made a lot more torque than the mostly N/A petrol engines.
TBF the big bonus in the UK was in much cheaper BIK, cheaper RFL and HMRC mileage rates for business use that might actually cover the fuel cost! ?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff