Originally Posted by Railrust
Yes let's do the math. You mention supplementing the need for the truck by simply renting one a day or two a month - then you throw out a figure of $20. Twenty dollars is a ninety minute rental, enough to get you to and from the place you rent it from. A full day rental is $100. A two hour rental is $45...not including taxes, fees, gas, or the inconvenience of having someone drop you off and pick you up to get the truck (what do you pay them?). So for arguments sake, let's settle on $150 a month...not $20, not $40, not $250.
$150 a month for a two days a month truck rental.
Absolutely wrong. Allow me to clarify. I said unless you live in a truly 'rugged' area such as "the rural parts of Montana/Colorado/Utah" (where roads often aren't actually roads, therefore certainly commanding an off-road vehicle such as a truck). This calls for a truck as a DD. You can't drive a car on your daily commute here. Now if you live more than 30-45 away from a decent size town, and you even occasionally use a truck for "actual" truck usage, again, I will agree a truck is a necessity. ONE. But my argument was targeted at the people who live within a major city and have a U-Haul, Lowe's, etc. within 5-10 minutes of their house. You should not need a truck for more than an hour in this case. So using my correct argument, it's $40/month. Taxes/fees/gas will be negligible in this case, so let's say $50 total. If you are within town, you shouldn't need anyone to accompany you, as you're returning soon anyway. You'll easily save $50 a month in fuel and other costs by DD'ing a car instead.
Originally Posted by Railrust
Now let's talk about gas mileage. I have the same engine in my 2018 Silverado as your 2008 LS engine with displacement on demand. Now you probably realize the differences in the two engines...it's now direct injected, different heads, different oil pump...different? Yes, but not dramatically different. Mine takes regular fuel. Plain old regular. The compression ratio doesn't require super, the head design doesn't demand it, the aspiration doesn't call for it. It's regular.
Now that's the 5.3 liter engine that's in all of the these half ton trucks driving around on the roads today. I have AVERAGED 24 mpg during the life of the vehicle...on regular with prices between $2.20-$2.65 a gallon during that time.
I don't see why you mention Super gasoline, unless your Monte Carlo SS requires it (which GM truck, and that's what we're discussing, doesn't).
Yes, that's what I said. I said "my V8 SS car [Impala]" and based all of those figures on my specific case. I never implied otherwise. I was not in any way saying that's what a normal truck would cost.
Originally Posted by Railrust
So if I commute in a Civic and it averages 38 mpg using regular. And my truck averages 24 mpg using regular. Depending on the actual miles I drive PER YEAR....let's say 15,000 miles (about average)...at $2.20 a gallon... I will pay out an additional $506.58 dollars a year in fuel costs. If I bump the gas pricing up to $2.50 a gallon, I will spend an additional $575.66
Correct so far...
Originally Posted by Railrust
So let's say I spend an additional $600 a year on fuel. Now let's factor in the truck rental. Let's go
$150 $50 a month for 12 months------
$1,800 $600 dollars IF you rent a truck twice a month EVERY month (who does that?).
Railrust said:
Now let's say you change my formula around. Let's say you take away the actual fuel economy I'm getting in my truck and drop it to 20mpg. And let's say you take away half of the truck rental costs...you're still not ahead of the game. But then I'd argue...well if I hadn't had to drive my truck in cold weather 4 months out of the year I'd average better than 24mpg! I would. Right now the weather has finally gone up into the 50's where I am, I'm now averaging 25.7 during my weekly 500 mile commute.
...Irrelevant what-ifs.
Originally Posted by Railrust
You said your Civic averaged 38, but the manufacturer specifies 35. GM states the 2018 5.3 Silverado averages 24, so my intitial estimates were actually more realistic than what your averages predicted.
WRONG, WRONG, AND MORE WRONG. If you're going to make comparisons, don't compare apples to oranges. This is where you must choose AVERAGE or HIGHWAY. Not one of each. Per EPA, the Civic gets 28/39, 32 average. A 5.3L '18 Silverado (depending on setup, trans, etc... we'll use the best case scenario without assuming hybrid) gets 16/23 19average. At your claimed $2.200 per gallon @15k miles/year, comparing averages the truck will use an extra $705.59 in fuel per year. Or if comparing highway the truck will consume an extra $588.63/year. What I supposedly get versus what you supposedly get is irrelevant, we must agree on a common fact. Therefore I used EPA numbers.
Originally Posted by Railrust
Now let's also consider the clientele we are talking about - the people trading in luxury sendans for pickup trucks - which is what the thread was titled. If I commute in a Civic, is that going to be my only vehicle? Is that going to be the car I meet friends out for dinner in? That going to be the car you pull up in to meet clients or drop your kid off (and his friends) at the movies in? Or do you need to buy another car for that? Because that will obviously add to the cost. Greatly.
I have no idea where you're going with that. What I consider an impressionable car is going to be different from your definition. I'm not out to impress anyone. I could care less. I'd rather impress someone via treating them to something with the money I saved on fuel instead of pulling up in a vehicle I can't afford. Regardless, it's irrelevant.