Diesel cars cost more to run than petrol - Drive

I bought my 100 series turbo diesel landcruiser to tow a 2.5 tonne caravan and a place to carry a tinny - on the roof of the cruiser. It is called 'fit for purpose'. Under similar conditions the petrol cruiser would be a lot more expensive to run and most smaller 4wds cannot legally tow that load.
My previous vehicle was an 80 series cruiser which I had for 12 years. It was totally reliable and didn't cost anything like the figures these people quote to run over that period of time. I guess if you change your vehicles every 3 years things might be different.
Chris W

I explored the idea recently of replacing our family car with a Hyundai i30 CDI. Although I was impressed by the vehicle itself, I decided to keep my 5.7L Adventra wagon (for various reasons).

Hi

There is a lot of holes in their testing, the main one is they use unleaded cost and cars like the astra and mondao use premium which is almost the same cost as diesel.

We just traded a 2lt manual 307 Pug for the new 2lt diesel 308 manual. The petrol averaged around 10.5 lt around town and around 6 -7 to Melbourne. The diesel averages under 7 around town and 4 to Melbourne.

The new 308 has a 20,000 service interval over the petrol 10,000 and the 308 is easier to repair so the insurance was cheaper.

And the best thing it drives like a scalded cat!!!

Have fun

Craig

HI,
Those figures and comparisons do not really mean much as they include depreciation (which is a significant component) over the life of the vehicle. Depreciation is not a cash weekly outgoing - really a book entry until you replace the vehicle.
So the Hyundai Getz costs $120 week to run! - thats about twice as much per week as it costs me to run my 6 cylinder HJ61 turbo diesel per week becuase my depreciation has flattened out is realistically negligible. .
If you buy any of the vehicles in 5 years time when the first big chunk of depreciation is taken out I dare say the comparisons would be entirely different.
Cheers,
Glen

One of the lesser-known disadvantages of Diesel cars is finding service techs who know how to service diesel. Service Depts have enough trouble finding techs who understand conventional petrol engines.

I'd hate to have any sort of problem with a hybrid ! They're so complex, only a Dealer has the information and the diagnostic equipment to go anywhere near it.

I run a Daihatsu Cure. The only fault that I can find is that I forget to put petol in it

I depends on how you think about it.

If you're an accountant you consider things like depreciation etc. If you're an economist you don't necessarily do that. The cost of the vehicle is a "sunk cost"...its gone, and that's it! I don't bother with depreciation in my calculations. Once I've blown my dough, I've blown it...no wishful thinking that I might somehow retrieve or minimize the cost by juggling numbers. I don't run a business so it is a mute point. When I buy another vehicle I'm starting afresh and if I can get something for my last one after I've used and abused it that just an unexpected bonus.

Did they figure in the cost of replacing a petrol car after 200,000k's and the diesel after about 1,000,000k's :P

Mike,
I always have a laugh at these reports. When I bought my land cruiser back in 1995 it cost me just on 52K new.
I paid outright for it so all it cost me after that was fuel, insurance and rego and servicing.

They base these costs on someone who finances the whole lot and depreciate the vehicle over 3-5 years with a residual value of about 15% of the original purchase price.

So based on thier figures a Landcruiser costs $20879.56 per year to run. I find it a bit hard to beleive.

Rob

Check out the actual data at www.racv.com.au

There is useful stuff in there, irrespective of how long you keep your vehicle and how you finance its purchase.

However the racv standardised data does not take into account a range of options and personal circumstances that are applicable to owning and financing a vehicle. Only an individualised net present value calculation suiting your circumstances will show you a valid comparison for petrol/petrol-lpg/diesel (and I now find, confusingly an lpg-diesel) comparison. I have just downloaded the SUV and 4x4 RACV data for the purpose of exploring the question.

For me, the most controversial part of the racv method is the financing costs. For my circumstances there is no way I will be borrowing to buy anything at current interest rates. I will be replacing this with what us economists call "opportunity cost", that is the income I could have earned from investing the first cost of the vehicle in some alternative safe investment, like bank deposits or low risk securities.

Secondly, the racv is correct in including depreciation as a real cost. It is a hit on your networth, even if you don't have to fork out cash. Your asset is "used up" over its useful life, and is realistically shown by decline in resale value over time.

However, the 5 year asset life assumed by the racv is probably not right for a diesel or even a petrol RV, looking at the used vehicle prices. The question is what is the age/efficiency profile and the corresponding maintenance costs for RVs? This data does not seem to be around.

Lastly, the playing field seems to have tilted in favour of petrol with the growing differential in the prices between diesel and petrol (and LPG). In a rational market I would expect this to show up in lower first cost and especially second hand cost of diesel vehicles falling to adjust for the fuel price differential. I think I have seen some of this already.

This has two implications. Diesel depreciation rates are increasing; buying second hand might be a better bet than new.