It only costs £40 to fill up
It only costs £40 to fill up
Author
Discussion

Spare tyre

Original Poster:

12,583 posts

160 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Does anyone else get confused by mongs who buy a new car and then go on to say its saving them money already cus it only costs x amount to fill up compared to their old car. Are they really that stupid, do they confuse the size of the tank with fuel efficiency

fking fk tts s

Urban Sports

11,321 posts

233 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Spare tyre said:
Does anyone else get confused by mongs who buy a new car and then go on to say its saving them money already cus it only costs x amount to fill up compared to their old car. Are they really that stupid, do they confuse the size of the tank with fuel efficiency

fking fk tts s
They are right, if the tank in their new car is smaller then it costs less to fill up than their old car.



WolfAir

456 posts

165 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Spare tyre said:
Does anyone else get confused by mongs who buy a new car and then go on to say its saving them money already cus it only costs x amount to fill up compared to their old car. Are they really that stupid, do they confuse the size of the tank with fuel efficiency

fking fk tts s
haha I kind of just said this when my brother and I bought our father a bmw 318d, from a c180 but in a different sense, road tax and mpg wise, but the savings arent really viable because of the cost of the new car at 12 grand, we would have to run the bmw at least 15 years, before we would make a profit over what we spent on the mercedes running cost wise.

Spare tyre

Original Poster:

12,583 posts

160 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Urban Sports said:
They are right, if the tank in their new car is smaller then it costs less to fill up than their old car.
True, but they have to fill up more often

Urban Sports

11,321 posts

233 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Spare tyre said:
Urban Sports said:
They are right, if the tank in their new car is smaller then it costs less to fill up than their old car.
True, but they have to fill up more often
Unless the new car is more efficient.

Supernova190188

934 posts

169 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
When I went to Toronto I hired a Toyota Camry , however according to the woman behind the desk I would have been better off with a big Jeep as it costs less to run . It didn't obviously, it just had a smaller tank so cost less to fill up , so in her eyes it was cheaper to run!

rehab71

3,362 posts

220 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
I had a situation once where I sold a girl a new Fiesta, after a year I got her back in and sold her a Ka (I thought she should get another Fiesta but her tt boyfriend persuaded her to buy a Ka). Any way a few week later she came back complaining she's having to fill the Ka more often and it was costing more to run. I tried explaining that the Ka had a smaller tank until I was blue in the face but she couldn't get her head round it!


vikingaero

13,362 posts

199 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Mrs V.'s Mitsubishi travels 28 miles per week and costs me £30 to fill up every 5-8 weeks or so!

IanMorewood

4,309 posts

278 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
28 miles per week? I take it you have never heard of public transport?

Jasandjules

72,611 posts

259 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Urban Sports said:
They are right, if the tank in their new car is smaller then it costs less to fill up than their old car.
The OP is a little disjointed, however I assumed he was more referring to the concept that a new car is expensive so they spend out thousands of pounds to save a few pounds here and there..

gizlaroc

17,251 posts

254 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
IanMorewood said:
28 miles per week? I take it you have never heard of public transport?
And there you go OP, the above response is the reason why people get so confused about life in general.


lowdrag

13,185 posts

243 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Not all newer cars are that much cheaper to run though. My old 202 Merc had a 62 litre tank, the newer 204 has a 59 litre. Merc make a big thing of the 7-speed auto's economy compared to the old 5 speed but after a year's motoring there is little difference between the consumption of the two overall, if any at all. Now the classic takes 120 litres, and it still runs out faster than the Merc!

vikingaero

13,362 posts

199 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
IanMorewood said:
28 miles per week? I take it you have never heard of public transport?
You're assuming public transport runs between her stops, they can sit in the car and do homework at gym and return home at 9pm when there is no public transport!

Matt UK

18,084 posts

230 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Urban Sports said:
Spare tyre said:
Urban Sports said:
They are right, if the tank in their new car is smaller then it costs less to fill up than their old car.
True, but they have to fill up more often
Unless the new car is more efficient.
hehe

I get what the OP is saying, but this is a good point well made.

David87

7,031 posts

242 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Spare tyre said:
Does anyone else get confused by mongs who buy a new car and then go on to say its saving them money already cus it only costs x amount to fill up compared to their old car. Are they really that stupid, do they confuse the size of the tank with fuel efficiency

fking fk tts s
Quite. It's the logic of a total moron.

EskimoArapaho

5,135 posts

165 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Spare tyre said:
Does anyone else get confused by mongs who buy a new car and then go on to say its saving them money already cus it only costs x amount to fill up compared to their old car.
Let me unconfuse you: it's entirely possible to have dissimilar cars with the same range and very different fuel tank sizes/economy. I have an LS400 and an Aygo, it costs £80 to fill up the former, and about £40 to fill up the second, and they both do about 400 miles on it.

Do you need a diagram?

Urban Sports

11,321 posts

233 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
EskimoArapaho said:
Spare tyre said:
Does anyone else get confused by mongs who buy a new car and then go on to say its saving them money already cus it only costs x amount to fill up compared to their old car.
Let me unconfuse you: it's entirely possible to have dissimilar cars with the same range and very different fuel tank sizes/economy. I have an LS400 and an Aygo, it costs £80 to fill up the former, and about £40 to fill up the second, and they both do about 400 miles on it.

Do you need a diagram?
hehe

Mr Gear

9,416 posts

220 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
Spare tyre said:
Urban Sports said:
They are right, if the tank in their new car is smaller then it costs less to fill up than their old car.
True, but they have to fill up more often
Depends how efficient the car is. People used to be shocked when I said I couldn't get 300 miles out of a tank on my "efficient" Audi A2. But it had a tank the size of a peanut, so was dead cheap to run.

PistonheadRob

49 posts

146 months

Monday 13th October 2014
quotequote all
Its like when people say I can can get 600 miles a tank on my new car......... They never state the size of the tank or the cost to fill it, just that it will do more miles

MissChief

7,994 posts

198 months

Monday 13th October 2014
quotequote all
It must be said though, they can be more efficient. I went from a 306 GTI-6 with a 60 litre tank to a Seat Leon Cupra with a 55 Litre tank and I routinely 30-50 more miles per tankful from the Leon than I did from the 306. Smaller tank and still goes further? Win/Win!