Pretty impressive

How many people ever sit down and actually work out how much they spend a year on fuel? I bet most would be surprised at how little they spend on this one of many different running costs of owning any vehicle.

On several occasions I have known people (blokes) who sold a near new V8 vehicle with low kilometres on them that they really liked and then suffered massive depreciation on the sale because someone convinced (nagged) them that they needed to save money by owning a more fuel efficient vehicle.
Then afterwards they sat down only to work out that they could have kept and driven the larger vehicle that they actually wanted for many years before they caught up with the difference they would save in fuel running costs versus the depreciation.

As a rule fuel costs are the cheapest part of owning any vehicle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joel0407

So somewhere between 11.5L/100km and 10.7L/100km.

That's nothing to worry about. It's as good as an old TD5 Disco 2. Given you said 650/Tank and a tank is 82L, I though you were getting 12.6L/100Km.

So when you say 650km per tank you mean somewhere between 10.7 and 12.6L per 100km.

FYI My Disco does roughly this:

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...014/06/585.jpg

I say roughly because I cant guarantee the speedo is accurate.

Happy Days

Happy Days.

---

That's pretty good if it's a V8, not so if a TD5.

Our old D2 TD5 manual constantly recorded 10.3l to 11l/100k to and from work, bullbar, winch, roof racks, awning, drawers, 32" muds, longrange tank, rear bar, on the highway, best was 10.5l/100k.

Our currant D4, it gets around 12l/100 to and from work, on the highway(last trip) 10.3L/100k.

These are fuel used figures, I only fill to the first click to keep it a constant filling proceedure.

We have never been able to get anywhere near the figures that some of the D3/D4 owners put up.

Baz.

The only relevance that fuel consumption has to me, as far as the Disco goes, is range ... know the consumption, know the safe range ... if any of us actually cared about fuel consumption, I'm sure that we'd all drive much lighter vehicles with smaller engines (or something like that).

My back of a fag packet calc says that I spend something in the order of $5K per annum on fuel across three cars we own. Combined rego, insurance and servicing cost more than that (very significantly in some years ... thanks to the Disco !) - and for most owner profiles, I'd wager that depreciation is the biggest cost component.

A year or so ago, I started doing a back of the fag packet calculation of cost per KM for each of my vehicles (inclusive of depreciation, servicing, rego etc) ... and quickly deleted it as it was too depressing when I got to the Disco :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TerryO

How many people ever sit down and actually work out how much they spend a year on fuel? I bet most would be surprised at how little they spend on this one of many different running costs of owning any vehicle.

On several occasions I have known people (blokes) who sold a near new V8 vehicle with low kilometres on them that they really liked and then suffered massive depreciation on the sale because someone convinced (nagged) them that they needed to save money by owning a more fuel efficient vehicle.
Then afterwards they sat down only to work out that they could have kept and driven the larger vehicle that they actually wanted for many years before they caught up with the difference they would save in fuel running costs versus the depreciation.

As a rule fuel costs are the cheapest part of owning any vehicle.

---

I do.
These days fuel cost can outstrip new purchase price if you buy the wrong vehicle.

Those thinking depreciation is the largest cost were right 30 years ago when fuel was cheap and vehicles were dear.

Over 300,000km you can put more than $45k worth of fuel in an economical diesel 4wd. Double that for a thirsty one.

The last petrol car I bought I paid $8k and put $9k in the tank over 80,000km. Sold the car for $4.5k. Fuel costs almost triple the depreciation.

It comes down to use and ownership profile - in my case I have put (fag packet) something like $6k worth of fuel in my sube in 8 years (42000km driven) vs unrealised depreciation which I would estimate to be more than $20k. Servicing, rego and repairs far outstrip fuel costs and depreciation currently blitzes the other costs combined.

In my little car, I've done 190,000km in 21 years and it is hard to say without doing the calcs what is the greatest cost, but I'd think that servicing and rego would outstrip fuel or depreciation. Note I don't say repairs for that one ... It was built properly haha !

It comes down to how many k's you do per year. If you average 15-20k per yr then fuel is probably the least cost - the more k's the closer fuel will come to being more exxy than rego & servicing

For me fuel economy is a big part i look at that as a big cost doing around 30 to 40kms a year i keep an eye on it where as servicing and so forth don't play as much as most of the new cars have capped price at the moment, when buying new if i was looking at the Prado for instance there is only about $1000 diff between petrol and diesel i wouldn't even consider the petrol, even the 200 series they run $6000 diff i wouldn't even consider the petrol their either because the difference in economy is huge what i consider each tank fill up and also the price between diesel and 98 petrol is about 20c a litre more for petrol so its just not worth it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redback

That's pretty good if it's a V8, not so if a TD5.

Our old D2 TD5 manual constantly recorded 10.3l to 11l/100k to and from work, bullbar, winch, roof racks, awning, drawers, 32" muds, longrange tank, rear bar, on the highway, best was 10.5l/100k.

---

Sure the TD5 will get much lower out of town. The best I've done was 10.5L/100km while towing a trailer with 5 new tyres on my 16" rims, Roof top tent and awning (both new in its box, not fitted) on top of the trailer. That was from Mt Isa across the Barkley to Three ways on my 18" rims with tyres worn past there markers and sagged suspension.

Now the Roof top tent is on top, 2 inch lift, snorkel, solar panel as a wind deflector in front of the tent, Awning, BFG Mud tyres and the best I can do is 13.8L/100km.

Happy Days

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Epic pooh

It comes down to use and ownership profile - in my case I have put (fag packet) something like $6k worth of fuel in my sube in 8 years (42000km driven) vs unrealised depreciation which I would estimate to be more than $20k. Servicing, rego and repairs far outstrip fuel costs and depreciation currently blitzes the other costs combined.

In my little car, I've done 190,000km in 21 years and it is hard to say without doing the calcs what is the greatest cost, but I'd think that servicing and rego would outstrip fuel or depreciation. Note I don't say repairs for that one ... It was built properly haha !

---

If you barely drive a car (under 6000km a year) then yes depreciation will beat fuel cost for the time you have it.
The extreme example is parking it up and watching the value drop.

But over the useful life of that car the fuel cost will still trump depreciation. The only exception is the car getting destroyed before it reaches high mileage.

Total fuel cost = Total km driven / fuel economy (km/litre) x $ per litre.

Simple example.
Total fuel cost = 300,000km / 10 km/litre x 1.5
Total fuel cost = $45,000

Compare total fuel cost to the total you paid for the vehicle and things start to get really interesting.
There are a staggering number of vehicles which will consume more than they originally cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TerryO

How many people ever sit down and actually work out how much they spend a year on fuel? I bet most would be surprised at how little they spend on this one of many different running costs of owning any vehicle.

On several occasions I have known people (blokes) who sold a near new V8 vehicle with low kilometres on them that they really liked and then suffered massive depreciation on the sale because someone convinced (nagged) them that they needed to save money by owning a more fuel efficient vehicle.
Then afterwards they sat down only to work out that they could have kept and driven the larger vehicle that they actually wanted for many years before they caught up with the difference they would save in fuel running costs versus the depreciation.

As a rule fuel costs are the cheapest part of owning any vehicle.

---

Absolutely! I'm one of those blokes. The strife (before we were married) convinced me to sell my VT Calais 5.7 Gen III V8 ....... And get a 4 cylinder Camry :BigCry:
.