dgpcolorado
Well-known member
While I take your point that most people do not buy cars with TCO in mind, consider that just driving a used beater will be vastly less expensive than any new car, even accounting for repairs, and that's the real TCO comparison for the budget-minded. Also, what about the need to replace the battery periodically? A gigantic but unknown cost. TCO for the LEAF is hard to calculate.DaveinOlyWA said:Ya, another example of the "blind leading the blind" here. might as well lump this into TCO of electric verses...well ANY car that burns gas.
if its a "normal" car. TCO is won after 3 years. if its an econo box (hand crank windows, AM radio, etc) it takes 6 years to win the TCO...
even with the odds that lopsided, its still a losing battle. people simply dont understand the difference between a $6,000 higher sticker verses an additional $2500 in fuel costs per year. how can ANYONE not see this?? ...
The LEAF TCO works better for high miles per year drivers. For low annual miles drivers—about 7200 miles per year for me—there is no way the TCO can come close to just driving the ICE and then replacing it with another used car. For example: just adding my LEAF miles to my ICE car would add about $1150 in fuel costs at today's prices, plus perhaps another $300 in additional maintenance. Call it $1500 in savings a year (and not counting the savings in license and insurance for the LEAF). How on earth can $1500 a year pay for my LEAF? The numbers just don't work (for me, a low annual miles driver).
Same with solar panels: it depends on subsidies and the installation cost. Payback for my original panels is 35 years. Payback for my new panels is 22 years. So, they aren't remotely cost-effective! I bought my LEAF and solar panels to drive on sunpower and avoid using oil. As I've said before: "people buy less useful toys, do they not?"
TCO isn't everything.