General 1.2 owners - Can you help please? (Costs)

[cowabunga]

Hi all

Some days ago I constructed a spreadsheet model which is in the thread "Real World 500 cost comparison". For the latest version please see #35 (Page 3) of that thread.

At the moment the basics are there but the blue cells in the model are currently arbitrary variables which I hope to refine over time with your assistance. When I get a good sample of the costs then this will enable all new prospective owners to compare costs for the various models.

Therefore please could I ask owners for a "running total" for the following items (MPG, Service costs per year, tyre life, insurance).

For example, person 1 may say (for example)
MPG: 43mpg (average 43/1)
Service: £200 (average £200/1)
Tyre life: 20,000 miles (average 20,000/1)
Insurance: £300 (average £300/1)

Then person 2:
MPG: 45mpg (running average 88/2= 44mpg)
Service: £250 (running average 450/2= £225)
Tyre life: 15,000 miles (running average 35,000/2 = 17,500)
Insurance: £400 (running average £700/2= £350)

Then person 3:
MPG: 47mpg (running average 135/3= 45mpg)
Service: £250 (running average 700/3= £233.33)
Tyre life: 15,000 miles (running average 50,000/3 = 16,666)
Insurance: £410 (running average £1110/3= £370)

etc, etc

Hopefully after a number of instances (the more the better) we will be able to see how in general these costs pan out on average for most people which will enable accurate real world cost measurement rather than the official ones which for instance use official mpg figures to calculate costs.

Thank you in advance.

 

[jrkitching]

Therefore please could I ask owners for a "running total" for the following items (MPG, Service costs per year, tyre life, insurance).

This is a bit like Maxi's thread asking folks to post their best 100mile mpg - interesting, but potentially misleading, so please be careful how you use the answers, in case a newbie gets fooled into thinking they will be able to achieve something that's personally unattainable for them.

I've also included the discount I got when I first bought it, since this could make a BIG difference to average running costs over the first 3 years.

Ok I'll kick off:

My 1.2 petrol (Year 1):

mpg: 59.6
1st Yr Service: (Oil + filter Change) £28.34; 2nd yr £85 (est.)
tyre life: 30k front / 50k rear (estimated)
insurance: £159 pa
initial purchase discount: £2000 + 2010 model for 2009 price ('free' suspension mods + S/S)

I'm going to add a 'wealth warning' to this; whilst the figures are real, you'll probably need to live in the right area, have a very clean long term driving record, potter about at a snail's pace & service it yourself to match them - and even after giving the warning, I'm still concerned someone could be misled into thinking the 1.2 500 is cheaper to run than it is.

 

[cowabunga]

This is a bit like Maxi's thread asking folks to post their best 100mile mpg - interesting, but potentially misleading, so please be careful how you use the answers, in case a newbie gets fooled into thinking they will be able to achieve something that's personally unattainable for them.

I've also included the discount I got when I first bought it, since this could make a BIG difference to average running costs over the first 3 years.

Ok I'll kick off:

My 1.2 petrol (Year 1):

mpg: 59.6
1st Yr Service: (Oil + filter Change) £28.34; 2nd yr £85 (est.)
tyre life: 30k front / 50k rear (estimated)
insurance: £159 pa
initial purchase discount: £2000 + 2010 model for 2009 price ('free' suspension mods + S/S)

I'm going to add a 'wealth warning' to this; whilst the figures are real, you'll probably need to live in the right area, have a very clean long term driving record, potter about at a snail's pace & service it yourself to match them - and even after giving the warning, I'm still concerned someone could be misled into thinking the 1.2 500 is cheaper to run than it is.

JR

Thanks for the response and I agree with what you say.

First of congratulations on getting the discount you have, impressive but for this purpose a new buyer would be doing that sum themselves if you see what I mean because discounts will change over time? so that is something I dont require.

For the rest of the values you make a valid point, something ive thought about already that the individual cases are not indicative of the whole. However after a lot of responses these items will smooth out hopefully to give representative figures. I think perhaps only servicing costs may be an issue because many of these could be "backended" to 3+ yrs. for other items old/ young, different areas etc, status, etc, should even themselves out imo.

So the first entry is:
Mpg: 59.6 (Average 59.6/1 = 59.6)
Servicing costs per year £56.67 (Average £56.67/1 = £56.67)
Tyre life: 40k miles (Average 40k/1 = 40k)
Insurance: £159 (average £159/1 = £159)

 

[stu0710]

Hi

2009 1.2 Lounge (total mileage 18000)

mpg = 42 (65% urban)

1st year service £130.00
2nd year service £185.00

Front tyres changed @ 14K - rears still have 4.5mm so assume 30-35K

Insurance £180.00 per year

 

[jrkitching]

...discount... ...a new buyer would be doing that sum themselves if you see what I mean because discounts will change over time? so that is something I dont require.

IMO an equally valid case could be made for taking insurance out of the equation, because this will be so very much affected by a person's age, location and personal driving history. For example, there's no difference at all in what I'd pay to insure a basic Panda & a 1.2 500 lounge, and it would cost me only a little extra for a TA - but for an 18yr old new driver, the difference between those cars could be a dealbreaker.

Which gives me a good opportunity to suggest, in the strongest terms possible, that noone should ever commit to buying any vehicle, new or old, until they've got a firm personalised insurance quote for their proposed use of it.

 

[RobinPJ]

My figures are rather vaguer than Mr K's:

MPG - averages around 40, but almost exclusively very short town centre rush hour journeys.
Service costs - one low mileage service after one year - think it was about £135.
Tyre life - minimal wear after 9,000 miles.
Insurance - think we pay about £300

 

[cowabunga]

Update (after 3 respondents)

Mpg average (141.6/3 = 47.2mpg)
Service average (344.17/3 = £114.72)
Tyre life average (63k/2 = 31,500mls)
Insurance average (£639/3 = £213)

Thank you to respondents so far, you will notice that I did not include tyre wear for the last respondent RobinPJ as data was inconclusive (you will notice the average is divided by 2).

JR - Again I won't disagree, a very valid point. I think the best strategy for Insurance is to estimate an indicative cost from the averages and then add in the caveat "Insurance costs are indicative averages from the survey and all potential purchasers should receive their own personalised quotes prior to purchase" or similar. Thank you.

 

[306maxi]

You can't simply divide the total service costs by the number of people or even the number of miles as the services are different prices. None of the people so far have done the 36k mile service which is a killer, even moreso the 72k mile service with the timing belt.

The service cost calculation is also faulty as well because, let's say RobinPJ has done 17500 over 20 months and is coming up to his 18k service, but has only done a low mileage service then his car will appear cheaper to run than it is, because in 9k miles he's due an 18k service including having the brake fluid done. Another 500 miles and his service costs may have tripled.

As for the mpg, you also shouldn't really accept all of the readings. To do a proper statistical analysis, you have to exclude the really high and really low MPG readings which can skew things somewhat. As good as jrkitching's MPG is, the vast majority of people simply will not get what he's getting, a couple of people on fuelly get sub 40mpg figures as well which most people thankfully won't get. jrkitching's services are also rather cheap and should be ignored from the point of a spreadsheet like this as 99% of people will never get their servicing that cheap.

Personally to get a representative figure of what the average person will achieve, I would remove anything over 55mpg and anything under 40mpg as these figures are out of the ordinary and just skew the figures, then I would do find the mean of that set of data.

You should get the person using the calculator to find out insurance costs themselves and input that.

Not to be patronising, but I feel there is much better value from a spreadsheet that actually calculates the service costs based on the real price of services and then calculates what services the user will require for their given mileage and time period. Simply averaging out the costs will skew the figures, especially when you get 5 years or any of the big services.

If you want to work on this together I'm more than happy to lend my experience and expertise and we can come up with something that will be surprisingly accurate.

 

[jrkitching]

You can't simply divide the total service costs by the number of people or even the number of miles as the services are different prices. None of the people so far have done the 36k mile service which is a killer, even moreso the 72k mile service with the timing belt.

The service cost calculation is also faulty as well because, let's say RobinPJ has done 17500 over 20 months and is coming up to his 18k service, but has only done a low mileage service then his car will appear cheaper to run than it is, because in 9k miles he's due an 18k service including having the brake fluid done. Another 500 miles and his service costs may have tripled.

As for the mpg, you also shouldn't really accept all of the readings. To do a proper statistical analysis, you have to exclude the really high and really low MPG readings which can skew things somewhat. As good as jrkitching's MPG is, the vast majority of people simply will not get what he's getting, a couple of people on fuelly get sub 40mpg figures as well which most people thankfully won't get. jrkitching's services are also rather cheap and should be ignored from the point of a spreadsheet like this as 99% of people will never get their servicing that cheap.

Personally to get a representative figure of what the average person will achieve, I would remove anything over 55mpg and anything under 40mpg as these figures are out of the ordinary and just skew the figures, then I would do find the mean of that set of data.

You should get the person using the calculator to find out insurance costs themselves and input that.

Not to be patronising, but I feel there is much better value from a spreadsheet that actually calculates the service costs based on the real price of services and then calculates what services the user will require for their given mileage and time period. Simply averaging out the costs will skew the figures, especially when you get 5 years or any of the big services.

If you want to work on this together I'm more than happy to lend my experience and expertise and we can come up with something that will be surprisingly accurate.

Some good points there Maxi - I hope you both can work together this time & come up with something that will help a prospective purchaser work out how much any particular model is likely to cost over their intended period of ownership.

I think everyone's data is useful - whether it's actually relevant to someone else depends on their own circumstances being similar to the individual posting it. For example, it's entirely possible for another person to equal or better my figures for mpg & servicing - but only if they drive in a similar manner and maintain the car themselves. Equally, many folks might like to know the likely cost of a brake fluid change at their franchised dealer vs their independent, but those numbers won't be relevant for me - I'm more interested in the price of a bottle of Dot4.

I'm looking forward to seeing what you both come up with - it's always interesting to get another slant on the costs of car ownership .

 

[cowabunga]

You can't simply divide the total service costs by the number of people or even the number of miles as the services are different prices. None of the people so far have done the 36k mile service which is a killer, even moreso the 72k mile service with the timing belt.

The service cost calculation is also faulty as well because, let's say RobinPJ has done 17500 over 20 months and is coming up to his 18k service, but has only done a low mileage service then his car will appear cheaper to run than it is, because in 9k miles he's due an 18k service including having the brake fluid done. Another 500 miles and his service costs may have tripled.

As for the mpg, you also shouldn't really accept all of the readings. To do a proper statistical analysis, you have to exclude the really high and really low MPG readings which can skew things somewhat. As good as jrkitching's MPG is, the vast majority of people simply will not get what he's getting, a couple of people on fuelly get sub 40mpg figures as well which most people thankfully won't get. jrkitching's services are also rather cheap and should be ignored from the point of a spreadsheet like this as 99% of people will never get their servicing that cheap.

Personally to get a representative figure of what the average person will achieve, I would remove anything over 55mpg and anything under 40mpg as these figures are out of the ordinary and just skew the figures, then I would do find the mean of that set of data.

You should get the person using the calculator to find out insurance costs themselves and input that.

Not to be patronising, but I feel there is much better value from a spreadsheet that actually calculates the service costs based on the real price of services and then calculates what services the user will require for their given mileage and time period. Simply averaging out the costs will skew the figures, especially when you get 5 years or any of the big services.

If you want to work on this together I'm more than happy to lend my experience and expertise and we can come up with something that will be surprisingly accurate.

Thanks Maxi, much appreciated, your comments are very helpful. I think between us we can come up with something which will be real world indicative and I appreciate your offer of assistance... or should I say partnership? lol

To briefly explain my background I have had a lot of experience in communications analysing a decent proportion a global costs base of 500m+ for a mutinational which is why (I think anyway!) I'm good as a financial modeller. As an example i'd create financial models like I did here the other day and then fish around for caveats/ assumptions by asking relevant experts of future projections. For instance if comms costs halve every 2 years, do you put in a bigger bandwidth pipe now or in 12months? that type of thing (scenario planning). The caveats and assumptions are critical to get this right. The other option is to not try and predict the future in which case there is little strategic direction as things (and costs) occur ad hoc with little visibility.

This "car cost" thing is something which has bugged me for ages in the back of my mind. The motoring press imo just takes the lazy option with simple calcs and there's no legwork. For instance the other day a poster stated a Panda was available sub £5,900, now the motoring press says this costs £X per mile to run, but thats at rrp or standard discount rates and in that scenario their figures are just rubbish and tells a prospective purchaser nothing.

With respect to your comments I did think about quite a lot of these over the weekend and yesterday, and kinda stepped back from this complexity when posting on here earlier today. I already appreciated the "Whats the use if a kid comes on and says 10mpg?" etc argument and it does at some stage need addressing.

That said I strongly believe that this does need to be in spreadsheet format as you suggest, both for clarity and keeping track of the averages. Then at some stage we will need to look at the figs and come up with what we feel is a worthwhile threshold to use for data inclusion, say 10-20% variance to the mean? 1 standard deviation? or similar.

Insurance is something im unsure about at the moment, whether to drop or collate averages?

Servicing is definitely an issue like you state, would appreciate some guidance on this.

And also when the answers started to come in for tyre wear I thought if that was worthwhile as many new owners (say sub 10k miles) wont have this issue yet.

If this works it could be powerful tool, not only for the 500 but the format may be transferrable to all Fiat cars.

I suggest maybe setting up a new thread so this doesnt lose it's focus, something like "500 cost assumptions" or similar then we can chew over the fat.

Thanks again!

 

[cowabunga]

FYI I've just heard back from the content editor of one of the big car mags who i emailed earlier.

I cheekily asked if he knew where I could get complete depreciation tables and he replied saying he has to pay handsomely for them and suggests I use the figures I can extract one by one off their site.

I thought this would be the response but no harm in trying.

 

[cowabunga]

FYI I've just heard back from the content editor of one of the big car mags who i emailed earlier.

I cheekily asked if he knew where I could get complete depreciation tables and he replied saying he has to pay handsomely for them and suggests I use the figures I can extract one by one off their site.

I thought this would be the response but no harm in trying.

I heard back from Andy Pringle at WhatCar?

"We have no problem with you using our figures – they are publically available, after all! All I would ask is that you credit the source whenever you ‘publish’ them."

As such I'll use their figs for depreciation but will also need to devise a method for calculating 1/2 year costs.