Here's another take:
The car with the best fuel mileage -- assuming here that one is concerned with total cost per mile, the only true gauge of "economy" -- is the one that is paid for and well-maintained.
Gas mileage is irrelevant. A safe car (at LEAST 3500-lbs and over) driven moderately and maintained well is the answer. Not to mention, well-designed and well-built. One serious wreck in a crackerbox and you can tell us all about it as you tap out the post with a straw in your mouth.
Just search the EPA website for the nitpicking numbers.
I can pretty well guarantee that my 13.5 mpg around town, paid-for 2001 DODGE is cheaper to operate over the course of a year over the same miles than the vast majority of vehicles that age and newer that are on the road. How? I maintain them better in the first, and I am not (and never did) having to pay off a bank loan . . I just waited until I had the money to buy one. (Obviously, I had to find the right one to fit my needs; its age/miles/condition had to be right, as well as the price. The dummy who owned it first swallowed the payments and the operating costs for four years, and then compounded his problem of money flowing out of his pockets by going and buying another one that "got better gas mileage".)
Fuel mileage is only about 12% total annual cost of a vehicle. Do the numbers.
Do the numbers for your situation, and you'll find that there is plenty-good vehicle you've likely not even considered if you buy one used.
Buying new -- unless there is a tax advantage -- is throwing money away, that, if invested at an even modest rate of return will give far more "economy" than new and "highest mpg".
The car with the best fuel mileage -- assuming here that one is concerned with total cost per mile, the only true gauge of "economy" -- is the one that is paid for and well-maintained.
Gas mileage is irrelevant. A safe car (at LEAST 3500-lbs and over) driven moderately and maintained well is the answer. Not to mention, well-designed and well-built. One serious wreck in a crackerbox and you can tell us all about it as you tap out the post with a straw in your mouth.
Just search the EPA website for the nitpicking numbers.
I can pretty well guarantee that my 13.5 mpg around town, paid-for 2001 DODGE is cheaper to operate over the course of a year over the same miles than the vast majority of vehicles that age and newer that are on the road. How? I maintain them better in the first, and I am not (and never did) having to pay off a bank loan . . I just waited until I had the money to buy one. (Obviously, I had to find the right one to fit my needs; its age/miles/condition had to be right, as well as the price. The dummy who owned it first swallowed the payments and the operating costs for four years, and then compounded his problem of money flowing out of his pockets by going and buying another one that "got better gas mileage".)
Fuel mileage is only about 12% total annual cost of a vehicle. Do the numbers.
Do the numbers for your situation, and you'll find that there is plenty-good vehicle you've likely not even considered if you buy one used.
Buying new -- unless there is a tax advantage -- is throwing money away, that, if invested at an even modest rate of return will give far more "economy" than new and "highest mpg".
