+- Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org)
+-- Forum: Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Lounge (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: The Logic of Multiple Vehicles (/showthread.php?tid=6802)
Pages:
1
2
The Logic of Multiple Vehicles - Ginger - 12-19-2007
For a long time I've made sure that I always have 2 operational vehicles. Usually I've kept a car and a motorcycle, the logic being that I can split wear & tear between them and always have back up transportation if something goes wrong.
But lately I'm starting to wonder how smart that is. I'll admit, my situation is extreme, but even pared down to 1 and 1, I still run into this problem: I'm always doing something. Right now my car is a train wreck... it needs replacement. OK, no big deal, right? Well, my CBR needs a chain, cam chain tensioner, and tires. My BMW needs a clutch, valve adjustment, TBI synch, full fluids change, and all filters. After that, the DRZ probably needs a valve adjustment and could go for new tires. Oh, and everything needs fresh oil. It's all too much, all the time.
... and my Accord has only once, in 183,000 seriously abused miles, left me stranded.
So here's the question: is it cheaper and easier, maintenance, wear and tear, considered, to just own one vehicle, or does the multi-math work?
I'd like to keep a motorcycle around for play no matter what.... but owning a Not Shit car that I can count on sure would be nice.
What has everybody's experience been throughout their motorsports careers (of course, please leave your track only car or bike out of the equation - those are in another catagory altogether).
Re: The Logic of Multiple Vehicles - .RJ - 12-19-2007
asteele2 Wrote:So here's the question: is it cheaper and easier, maintenance, wear and tear, considered, to just own one vehicle
Yes. Unless you have a really long commute (40-50 miles) the math never works out in your favor for a 2nd vehicle.
- Mike - 12-19-2007
i ask myself that question all the time. simply put, i'm paying ~450/mo (cost + insurance) just so i can be comfy when i drive.
Re: The Logic of Multiple Vehicles - Ginger - 12-19-2007
.RJ Wrote:asteele2 Wrote:So here's the question: is it cheaper and easier, maintenance, wear and tear, considered, to just own one vehicle
Yes. Unless you have a really long commute (40-50 miles) the math never works out in your favor for a 2nd vehicle.
Care to elaborate? I'm looking for a little more than yes/no.
Lets assume all vehicles are owned outright - sunk costs irrelevant.
- Apoc - 12-19-2007
I think RJ's talking in terms of gas savings but your situation isn't a matter of buying a beater to save money.
The problem with your situation is that you have two shit-ish vehicles. If you have the "spread out wear and tear" then chances are you're not going to benefit from multiples because they're both going to eventually have issues. Spend the combined cash and get one vehicle that serves all purposes. That said, you're one of the few that actually considers a motorcycle a "vehicle". I think in most cases people would make sure they have a "not shit" car first before considering spending money on a bike.
Re: The Logic of Multiple Vehicles - .RJ - 12-19-2007
asteele2 Wrote:Care to elaborate? I'm looking for a little more than yes/no.
Lets assume all vehicles are owned outright - sunk costs irrelevant.
I'm going to pull a message from another board, because its already there and I dont have to write it out already - this is just an example in using 2nd car to save on gas mileage for the daily commute, but the principles dont change:
Quote:Quote:RJ - I think a $500 beater getting 30mg would pay for itself within a few months
Common error.
Think it ALL the way through.
Just using nice round numbers to keep is simple:
Lets say I have a truck that is paid for. It gets 15mpg and costs $1200 a year in insurance and tags. Lets figure gas at $200 a month.
So my operating costs (minus maintenance and repair) for the truck is $3600 a year (gas/insurance/tags).
So I want to save money on gas, and I think a "beater" that gets me double the truck's mileage is a good call. So I drop $1000 on a 15 year old Hondissan SE-X that gets 30mpg. Now my yearly fuel bill has dropped from $2400 to $1200... Friggin awesome... Right?
Well... Not so fast sparky. You still have to get tags and put insurance on that puppy. Even if you go for minimum coverage lets say you are still looking at $500 a year and another $100 for registration. Half the truck, but still $600.
In summary:
Yearly operating cost of the truck - $3600
Cost for the "beater" in the first year - $2800
No, it doesn't "pay for itself" in a few months, and you are still paying that tag and insurance bill on the truck even if you aren't driving it. All this assumes that beater doesn't need parts and TLC, which it probably does.
So your actual automotive costs from adding the beater in the first year are ...
$4000
The only thing you saved was the gas usage on the truck ($2400) but you replaced that $2400 with $2800.
Hmmmm... Not exactly brilliant.
The only way this scenario actually makes sense is if you have a HUGE commute to work every day and a massive monthly fuel bill. If thats the case, then yes, a big gas mileage older compact is worth having.
- Ginger - 12-19-2007
Apoc Wrote:The problem with your situation is that you have two shit vehicles.
Right - this isn't about gas (everything gets more than 25mpg in it's current form - the, Accord ~25, DRZ is 62mpg, the CBR is 40, and the BMW should come in about 35,)... it's just about maintenance costs.
But I actually own 4 vehicles... really, only one of which is junk (the car... the bikes may be kind of specialized, and the bimmer fills their gaps, but none of them have ever let me down [at least not in a fashion attributable to anything but my own stupidity]). And yeah, I'm one of the weirdos that considers my bike transportation... that said, I'm begining to feel like I want my bike(s) to be toys. They could help with the load a little, but I'm thinking in terms of much more heavily using a 4 wheeler.
- .RJ - 12-19-2007
Apoc Wrote:I think RJ's talking in terms of gas savings but your situation isn't a matter of buying a beater to save money.
I am, but you're still playing a shell game whether it is gas mileage, repairs, tires, oil changes, and so on. The more shells in the game, the more you're paying.
I had a habit of owning 2 or 3 cars at all times.. it does add up. The more old, questionably maintained shit you own, the more shit breaks and it all adds up to more than just having one decent (not necessarily new or expensive... just decent) car.
- Apoc - 12-19-2007
While I agree with your (Giles') post, I don't think it applicable to Ginger's question at all. He's basically asking if buying two vehicles for the sake of always having one working is worthwhile. My answer is no because you can spend the money on one better one. Now if you throw in the whole "well I need a motorcycle too" then it becomes a non-issue.
The simple is answer is one vehicle will always be a better value for your money... that's why I spend the money on nice ones I can drive whenever, rather than a decent one and a beater.
You really have to dismiss a bike as a pure hobby, if you want to be able to financially justify owning it in addition to a car.
- .RJ - 12-19-2007
Apoc Wrote:While I agree with your (Giles') post, I don't think it applicable to Ginger's question at all
Its not directly applicable but the principle is having multiple vehicles to serve some purpose rarely works out. So you're not buying another vehicle to save on gas... you're buying another vehicle so you dont have to replace tires or change the oil as often as the other one. You still lose.
I'm really ok with 1 street bike and the truck. I dont want/need any more hassles than that, I'm certainly not done spinning the revolving garage door but I'm done having redundant transportation.
- Apoc - 12-19-2007
Andrew, put it this way...
To make fiscal sense, every vehicle has to fit a niche and share very little overlap with another.
Yes I have two bikes but they're used for two totally different things. I see it the same as a track bike and a street bike, really.
- Ginger - 12-19-2007
I guess the end game, and question I should have posed in the begining is this:
I'm faced with a choice in replacing the Accord. I can buy a truck now.. I can probably find something under 2 grand that will last me a while. But in doing that, I restrict myself to using the truck for really, really cold days, and ones with precipitation (assuming the bikes will pick up the slack).
OR, and I'm kind of leaning this way, I drop down to 1 bike and 1 [nicer] car.
The more I think about it, the more it isn't a quetion of maths, but of diminishing returns... each motorbike is incrementally less fun than the VFR was all by itself. So - do you re-reach the margin with Egan's 5 Motorcycle Nirvana, or by riding less and enjoying it more that way?
- .RJ - 12-19-2007
Put Bobo Chrome on track :lol:
- Apoc - 12-19-2007
I have no idea what Ginger just said.
- .RJ - 12-19-2007
asteele2 Wrote:I'm faced with a choice in replacing the Accord. I can buy a truck now.. I can probably find something under 2 grand that will last me a while.
Yes, but a $2000 truck isnt going to be maintenance/hassle free either. So you havent made much progress that way (if your goal is reduced maintenance cost).
asteele2 Wrote:But in doing that, I restrict myself to using the truck for really, really cold days, and ones with precipitation (assuming the bikes will pick up the slack)
Would you only drive it less because the operating costs are higher?
asteele2 Wrote:So - do you re-reach the margin with Egan's 5 Motorcycle Nirvana, or by riding less and enjoying it more that way?
With no garage, the BMW is probably fine on its own, and keeping the F4 around to use as a track bike (or put tags on it and ride it on occasion too).
- Ginger - 12-19-2007
Apoc Wrote:I have no idea what Ginger just said.
I should just start a poll...
1 truck, lots of motorbikes.
1 nice car, 1 nice motorbike.
Go.
- .RJ - 12-19-2007
asteele2 Wrote:I should just start a poll...
1 truck, lots of motorbikes.
1 nice car, 1 nice motorbike.
How about no more busted ass vehicles
- Apoc - 12-19-2007
asteele2 Wrote:1 nice car, 1 nice motorbike.
...but I don't do track days.
- Ginger - 12-19-2007
.RJ Wrote:Would you only drive it less because the operating costs are higher?
With no garage, the BMW is probably fine on its own, and keeping the F4 around to use as a track bike (or put tags on it and ride it on occasion too).
About the truck: mostly, yes. And because I figure the more I drive a truck I paid that little for the more quickly it would get to the point it's not worth fixing.
About the BMW: I kind of hope it would be fine... but Phil talks as if it's like, a maintenance water fall.
I dono. I'm all clueless.
- .RJ - 12-19-2007
asteele2 Wrote:And because I figure the more I drive a truck I paid that little for the more quickly it would get to the point it's not worth fixing.
Which is where you are with the accord? Not sure the point then...