When cars cost too much to run

Once owned a RAV4 that when booked in for its annual service, I was told the same i.e., brake discs needing replacing due to corrosion on discs caused by not using brakes enough to keep them shiny and smooth. When a vehicle is in the driveway or garage and overnight it rains, discs display rust spots which are eliminated after taking vehicle out for even a short run, using the brakes. I ignored the garage’s advice and ran the RAV4 for another year before taking it to a different garage for servicing who serviced it and DID not mention anything about the discs needing replaced. Discs were never replaced in my 5 years of ownership and when sold back to a dealership they tested the RAV4 prior to exchanging for a new car and still did not mention anything about the discs. New car, a Kuga, after driving fir a year and putting it in for its 1st service, I was told that tyres needed replacing as the fronts were down to 4.4mm & 4.5mm respectively at a cost of nearly £600 even though legal limit is 1.6mm!!! Moral here, get a second opinion.

The EU consumption figures are derived from standard tests to put published consumption figures on a common basis; they are not claimed to represent real life. This is not about manufacturers mis-claiming. One place to look for real life figures is Honest John’s website.

Peter

I bought a Golf 1.6D Match a year ago, rejecting the economy BlueMotion simply because there was no spare wheel. I have yet to measure the true fuel consumption but assuming the gauge is reasonably accurate I can achieve over 60 mpg on longer journeys without difficulty. Thanks to a lot of short journeys and paying less attention to how I drive, my average over the last 2k miles is only 58.6mpg. I reckon that Which? is right in saying that driving technique and how the vehicle is used that is important.

If you study the instantaneous fuel consumption it is not difficult to see how to use less fuel. My experience is that being slightly held up in traffic can produce substantially better fuel economy than driving at constant speed. Constant speed is important for safety on motorways but there is certainly no need for this on single-carriageway roads. I will focus on my driving again and expect to average over 60mpg this summer.

Some people use their air conditioning all year round. I don’t know how much extra fuel this uses, but there is certainly a running cost.

You state that you use cruise control on long journeys. While this is a boon to a relaxed drive it has been shown that it uses more fuel than a careful right foot. Top Gear tried to get a new Audi diesel from London to Edinburgh and back on one tank of fuel and was on course to miss by a big margin until J Clarkson turned off the cruise control. He just made the target.

In my experience of cruise controls, I have discovered over several years that on long journeys, for example through France where the traffic is relatively sparse compared to British motorways, I have considerably bettered my average mpg whilst travelling utilising the cruise control. I never get the sameresults in the UK.

I bought a VW Tiguan 2Ltr 2wd Bluemotion brand new in Janurary 2012 all went well till I went to collect after signing the hand over docs my wife noticed it said 4wd oh dear pointed out to the salesman who said you are lucky you have got 4wd for the price of 2wd when asking about fuel consumption told very little in it you will be ok told to expect about 45mpg .After 1000mls found average 35mpg on a journey around urban cycle 23-25mpg this was horrendous went back to the dealer who found nothing wrong with the vehicle said run it in a bit more . 1500mls later still no i,provement went back to the dealer and complained told shouldnt of excepted the vehicle in the first place ???? g had close relative dying of cancer at the time of delivery and had to cut handover short and rush away In the long term I couldnt afford to run the vehicle ended up with the correct vehicle 8 months later and having to fork out another £2500 morale of the story dont ever believe manufacturers quoted MPG told they are dont independantly of the manufacturer so there fore no re-course, ask a few owners about fuel consumption before parting with your hard earned think twice before parting with the honeypot

The instantaneous mileage read out on the Golf I find meaningless and distracting to the point of dangerous, as it changes in the blink of an eye, and can vary from 13 – 200mpg in a millisecond.
The Gold has two memory indicators, no 1 for day to day journeys and no 2 for monitoring up to 999 hours of travel. No.1 monitors average, as opposed to instant, fuel consumption, every few seconds for any given trip, whilst No2 will give you longer term average consumption.
No 2 memory in conjunction with accurate mileage recording on fuel fill ups confirm one another at an average overall consumption at present of 56 mpg (up from 50 mpg when new) which accords with the returns on Honest John website for this model, at about 86% of the manufacturers claimed figures.

I see the instantaneous fuel consumption indicator useful to help understand how the engine is using fuel and has helped me adapt my driving to decrease use of fuel. I don’t use it very often and would not look at it when overtaking, negotiating a junction, or driving in heavy traffic.

I just got a new Golf last week.
I have not come to terms with what is meant by range. This changes on a whim. With a full tank it sugested400 miles. Next day, after I had driven 120 miles, it suggested 550 miles. Now at under half a tank it says 220. I’ll fill up again tomorrow and enter the details in to a spreadsheet on my computer at home and that will give me the actual accurate information from each time I fill up and also the average over the next two or three years that I expect to keep it.

BMW 520d M sport since new, fantastic car to drive, but so expensive to service, and the run flat tyres have to be the special ones made for a BMW.
Have had to fit 6 new tyres in the last 4 years ! This is car is probably best as a company car where you don’t have to pay the running costs !

As stated by Honest John (Daily Telegraph) car manufacturers have no option but to comply with EU fuel usage procedures. True they probably switch off every electrical device, pump the tyres up hard etc. but they all do the same. HJ publishes readers’ figures and compares them with the quoted ones.

Jaguar S type SE auto 2.7 diesel. Published “combined” mpg figure is 36mpg. Computer currently says 39.5mpg over approx 5000 miles. Mind you taking into account Jaguar electrics and electronics, the computer figure could be wrong!

I am staggered that people just accept what the manufactures say when they must know that these tests are done under lab. conditions.

Keith H, if this is your first auto, the simple solution to the ‘it chooses a high gear’ is to simply press harder on the accelerator – the DSG box (like all autos) will change down a gear. No need for manual intervention!

And FWIW, I have a diesel auto. I reach or exceed the published mpg figures with careful (but not unduly slow) driving. I’ve long ago concluded that manufacturer’s figures can constitute an **approximate** pecking order, but this order can be **way** wrong if your driving style is very different to the way the official figures are generated (and I’m not implying it’s anyone’s fault – you can’t help it if your commute is in heavy stop-start traffic).

Disagree with comments about the Ecoboost. Since purchased has mainly been used for short trips to drop off and pick up my son at school (16miles a day) I live in a very hilly area and still return 38 mpg. Previously owned a 1.6 Focus and the consumption was a lot worse doing the same trips, and the driving experience was nowhere as good as the 999cc.

Difficult. I suppose there is the Renault Twizy, which does not even have windows, but it probably comes with the other features.

We need to know whether you expect your ideal car to come with a full-size spare wheel, tyre sealant or a space-saver that looks as if it might suit a Morris Minor.

A proper full-size spare wheel is a must! Another “old fashioned” feature would also be desirable as well, that is a steering/suspension/transmission system that can be lubricated/replaced piecemeal; not the “sealed for life” types of today where “life” is short.

Smofalsh – I can certainly relate to the comments made in your first post. The main unexpected costs of running my last car were due to faults in the central locking system and electric windows, the latter being a well known weakness with the model.

Twenty years ago I would have joined you in condemnation of modern sealed-for-life assemblies but good design can make them reliable and for those who pay for servicing rather than do it themselves (a large majority) the modern practice can be more cost effective.

I expect that rising fuel costs will push manufacturers to ditch the ridiculously wide wheels fitted to many modern cars, which will make it more practical to store full-size spare wheels. Many have learned the hard way that tyre sealant does not always work and that they will need a new tyre even if it does – which certainly adds to running costs.

I would not like to go back to a car without air conditioning. Even in the UK it can become sometimes become unpleasantly hot inside a car.

Wavechange – Having spent most of my professional life within the motor industry it is only the advent of more advanced lower-cost materials and better precision engineering that has led to “sealed-for-life” assemblies in order to keep the cost -and more importantly- the unsprung weight down. The old-fashioned greased type assemblies would outlast most modern greaseless types provided they were correctly maintained and that was despite the fact that materials then used were not of the same quality available today.
Regretfully the days of a spare wheel are over due to the weight/space/cost implications of modern vehicular design. Decades ago I had a Rover SD1 Vitesse with a full sized spare. It was too wide to fit completely in the spare wheel well, and the alternative position (upright to one side of the boot space) took up too much room!
The Land Rover Defender has the air conditioning I like – Opening vents!
I usually only utilise air conditioning (or so-called climate control) during the wet winter(?) months when inner condensation presents itself.

As with your car service contract, you can buy extended warranties for your washing machine and TV, buy peace of mind by having your central heating on a service contract, and protect yourself from unexpected costs caused by problems with water and sewage systems between your house and external services. Some will benefit and some will not, but on average these services are not good value for money – as Which? frequently points out to us. I think it is better to regard the courtesy car as part of the service you pay for rather than complimentary.

I got a pretty good deal from VW on our Golf, with a free service package included up to 30,000 miles or 3 years.
The service intervals were only at 10K, but when it went in for its 30K service, for a payment of only £50 the dealer changed the service intervals to long term 18K from then on, which means It won’t require another service until after our current lease contract ends next at 45K.

I think we need proper trials. I get bigger differences that this when filling up with the same fuel at the same pump.

I’ve tried the diesel – around 5% more expensive, but I wouldn’t be confident I got 5% more mpg. Difficult to replicate the same drive. I do buy it when I visit Shell on the basis that it helps clean the engine – am I being duped?
I think Which did some tests a couple of years ago and found then the “better” grades were not more economical. I think Honest John rates them though. A test programme for Which members?

Malcolm

I’m sure you will remember when it was standard practice to decarbonise engines every 30,000 miles and change oil every few thousand miles. If buying a more expensive fuel did give significant benefits in fuel consumption or avoiding engine problems, I’m sure that this would be well known by every motorist. There may be a benefit in using a higher octane rating than necessary in a petrol engine but like you I have driven diesel vehicles for years and I am not up-to-date.

Increasing the content of biodiesel in road fuel could conceivably result in significant differences between brands and if the motorist is faced with expensive damage or even ‘diesel bug’, that could make petrol engines a more economical option.

The only time I have deliberately paid extra for fuel was when low sulphur diesel was an option. As an asthmatic who is strongly affected by sulphur dioxide I was desperate to hasten phasing out of the old fuel.

In my experience on diesel fuel, you would have to do an enormous amount of miles each year to recoup the difference in cost between the supermarket fuels and the so-called premium fuels offered by Shell and others.

Peter, on MPG (l/100km!) I’d agree. It depends whether you believe that additives and the claims made for them benefit your engine; there are informed opinions that some supermarket fuels lack additives that are beneficial.

Road fuels have to comply with British Standards and perhaps we would know by now if the manufacturers were cheating us or if substandard fuel was on sale. I don’t doubt the claims that the premium fuels have additives that may be beneficial, but if there was evidence that cheaper fuels were blocking injectors, causing (engine) fuel pump failures or creating other costly damage on a regular basis, we would know by now.

The motor manufacturers need to collaborate closely with fuel producers to ensure that standard fuels on sale are fit for their purpose. This will be particularly important when the biodiesel component of diesel road fuels in increased for good environmental reasons.

wavechange, I’m not suggesting supoermarket fuels don’t meet BS or are substandard, only that “premium” fuels may (do is claimed) have extra additives that are beneficial to engine longevity and performance. Honest John strongly advises using them. Premium fuels additive packages definitely makes them far superior to any fuel from a supermarket. “Most fuelling system problems reported to me are by readers who have been using supermarket fuels” (HJ). Search on his website under AskHJ.

I was certainly not criticising your comments, Malcolm. I was just adding some relevant information.

I would trust independent tests commissioned by an independent organisation such as Which? What motoring journalists, car magazines and fuel manufacturers have to say is interesting but not necessarily reliable information.

wavechange, not taken as criticism. In the (current) absence of fact about premium fuels I was pointing to someone who has experience and generally comes up with sound information, It is slightly off topic, except that for those who run cars to high mileage (I do) it may be a sound investment and reduce overall costs.

Information about high mileage cars is obviously most useful in establishing the benefits of premium fuels.

In addition to considerations of economy and reliability of engine components, the evolution of the diesel engine is another consideration. Some modern diesel engines are known to be more demanding about fuel they burn, and can be expensive to fix if problems arise. I won’t go into detail but it’s fairly easy to find information about this.

Completely unrelated, but a possible unforeseen cost of running a modern diesel car is cost of replacing a blocked diesel particulate filter (DPF). When I bought a diesel last year I was warned that it would not be suitable for lots of short journeys.

wavechange, you have been told correctly – you need to get the DPF up to a temperature that will burn off the residual diesel, I understand. So journeys of around 10 miles at least recommended. More of a case these days for petrol cars, particularly as they become more economical.

I was aware of the problem and would have switched to petrol if I was still commuting 1.7 miles to work each day, but it was a bit of a surprise when the salesman gave me a leaflet explaining the need to do periodic longer journeys at higher speed so that the cleaning process DPF is effective. I do at least one 50 mile round trip a week and so far the warning light showing an urgent need for a high speed run has stayed off. There is no soot on the tail pipe and I don’t even know when a cleaning cycle is occurring.

I’m sure that a petrol car makes sense for someone who drives less than 10,000 miles a year, but it’s just a daft personal preference and if I keep the car for ten years or more it will probably not cost me much more.

That might be the basis of another discussion. Trying to remain on topic, the introduction of biodiesel into road fuel is a relevant but not obvious consideration in the choice of a vehicle.

Does that include budgeting for a replacement battery (or battery leasing costs)? I have heard a lot of talk about electric vehicles but don’t know one person who has taken the plunge.

Did you pay around £10,000 etc for an electric car as comparable to an equivalent Petrol and Diesel Car? On top of this there will be the cost of replacing the battery in a few years time. I am not sure how long the batteries last and how much they cost to replace. Probably around £5,000. Apart from the cost of car another major point is the range of electric cars. As i understand it its only about 50 miles unless you do not use any electrics in the car, for example AC in summer and heater in Winter etc. I think currently electric cars are OK for people with a lot of spare money and who do not mind the hassle of charging the car every day or so. Imagine if they forget to charge their car and realise they have to go urgently somewhere. I won’t be laughing too much on people driving Petrol and Diesel cars yet. Give it another 15 years and then may be.

Give it another 15 years and then i will start thinking of using an electric car.

I wonder how many miles it will take to recoup the massive extra costs of an all-electric vehicle – even allowing for the Govt. cash back subsidy, and how long the batteries will last ?
If you take into account the development and manufacturing costs of all-electric cars, plus the generating costs of power, I don’t see how they can ever be truly economical to run.
Add to that the dreaded range anxiety of only around 80 miles at best and a charge time of many hours, I’m afraid I don’t see the point.
GM / Vauxhall may have it partly solved with the Ampera / Volt models (same mechanicals different bodies) whereby the petrol engine charges the batteries whilst you are on the go, so no range anxiety, and you always drive ‘electrically’ but, again, given the cost, you would have to do an awful lots of miles per annum to justify.
The long term solution is going to be in more and more efficient ICE vehicles, with possibly a smattering of diesel hybrids around as well, once they can get the particulate pollution problem in cities sorted out.

I was wondering if we might be going off at a tangent discussing electric cars but the URL for this page mentions diesel-electric hybrid even if the introduction does not. 🙂

As far as all-electric cars go, I think the problem is trying to produce a car with a high speed and long range capability. A small electric car with a top speed of 40 mph might be just the job as a second car for those living in built-up areas.

George, the argument I’ve heard is that it is supply and demand. There is a limited amount of the refined products that can produce diesel and allied oil for heating – the demand for the latter affects the price of diesel. So presumably depends on how cold the winter is. Is this a smokescreen?

Malcolm – I remember reading exactly the same, but it was quite a few years ago. At one time there was a different grade of diesel supplied (for road use at least) in the colder months, but that seems to be history. Assuming that petrol and diesel are produced by the same companies, they can choose how to price their products irrespective of cost to produce as long as their competitors decide to use a similar strategy.

I use an independent mechanic – ex Renault – for our Espace. His approach is to take the car for MoT, and repair anything that is modest in cost. Otherwise he phones me with a price. He apologised last time when he had to replace the rear brake discs and pads – the discs also combine wheel bearings – because it was going to cost £324 including the MoT, collection and delivery. I’m not unhappy with that attitude!
Best thing with an MoT is put it in for test only, then if it fails look at quotes for putting things right.