Same thing with my 86 Jeep Comanche. I would take it in to something repaired every few months when I could afford it, granted I was trying to slowly restore it while driving it as my only vehicle, never a good idea. When I recently got some budgeting software and categorized all my expenses for 2007 my monthly truck maint cost was $300, wow, I had no idea.

Of course much of my cost was #1 rare vehicle with no aftermarket parts, #2 Manufacturer (AMC) nolonger exists, #3 High demand causing prices including blue book to double in last few yrs and #4 20 yr old electrical components made by Renault in France, and impossible to find in the US. Now that I have a new car and dont have to be driving the truck while it’s rebuilt and I can do more the whole thing at once it’s significantly cheaper.

Put all your credit card and checkbook purchases into MS Money for the last year and you’d be suprised what an older car costs you. At some point, despite it being paid for, it costs you more than a new one, if you work out the TCO.

That having been said, if you upgrade, you won’t see *pure* fuel cost savings equal to $200 per month at 15,000 miles per year until gas hits $6.40 a gallon.

Regardless, with a brand new car covered under warranty, you won’t have the same maintenance costs that come with a car that’s four year years old. That can be quite a large wildcard …

As vehicles age, you need to take care of the pure maintenance items – tires, brakes, exhaust systems, timing chains, and the like. This can quickly add up.

Switching to a more fuel efficient vehicle won’t make your payments in their entirety … but I’ll maintain that it can substantially offset those costs …

The government needn’t print and spend more money that they don’t have … the public need only understand the benefits and ramifications …

But here’s the question for mpg-o-editor… If your car’s paid for, the only way your annual gas savings will be higher than your annual car payments will be if you trade in your 15 MPG SUV for a 45 mpg el-cheapo subcompact.

For someone like me who gets 24 MPG in mixed (78% highway, 22% city) driving, driving 15k miles a year, if I traded to a 40 MPG car, I wouldn’t see savings equal to a $200 a month car payment until gas got over $9.50 a gallon. For a $300 per month payment, I’d either have to trade up to a 60 MPG car (instead of 40 MPG) or see gas prices hit $14.50 a gallon.

Whether it’s an early termination fee on a lease, adding years to your car payment, or taking on a brand new car payment, the economics of changing cars is such that you have to do a lot of driving and see a dramatic increase in mileage and/or gas prices for you to break even.

If the government wanted to stimulate the economy by promoting gas mileage, the best way would be through immediate credits and subsidies on high MPG cars, like they’ve done for hybrids. Raising mandatory standards (like Jake noted) takes too long and the economics of upgrading doesn’t work for many drivers if it’s all out of their own pockets.

It makes SO much sense …that I’m pretty sure the administration would not even consider it….

When people know about the choices that are available they will decide for themselves. Perceptions will change. Look at how the automakers are finally touting MPG numbers in their advertisements (again).

I’ve been driving a domestic SUV over the past week or so that gets 30% better mileage than its conventional gas engine counterpart. Same vehicle, different engine … it’s available TODAY, it’s NOT a hybrid, and it’s not pigdog slow by ANY means …

I’m all for better gas mileage, I just don’t see it boosting the economy.