Cost of Ownership Musings
 

From time to time, I like to calculate the cost of ownership of my vehicles.
For my purposes, I'm using purchase cost plus all maintenace and repairs (thus I'm excluding fuel, insurance, inspections, etc....). Somewhat arbitrary, but those are the big variables.

We bought our 2002 Honda Odyssey new and have driven it 134,000 miles. Over this time, we have spent $30,710 including the purchase price of $26,000 or so. We had an extended warranty through 100,000 miles, so overall maintenance and repairs have been really low. Anyway, that comes to 22.9 cents per mile.

I bought my 1992 300D at 137,500 and have driven it 87,000 miles. On it, my total cost of ownership is 25.9 cents per mile.

I've only had the 1991 300D for 14,000 miles, so figures wouldn't be meaningful yet.

What do you think? Can the MB catch the Honda (I have my doubts)? And can I get either one under 20 cents per mile? Only time will tell.

Another happy variable is that my ability to do my own work is only improving. So that will offset, to some degree, more frequent repairs, higher labor rates, and higher parts prices.

I dont even want to think of all the money I've put into this Wagon. It's a labor of love to me.

Here in the UK, the AA did some tests many years ago, and they found that on average the cost of car ownership was 25pence (100 pence to the pound now) per mile.

This was instantly derided by everyone from motor manufacturers to the motoring public (who mainly buy vehicles on hire purchase of some sort) at large.

I have always found the AA figure to be surprisingly accurate, across a great range of vehicle types and ages and classes.

I have found similar correlations in the cost of buying "energy", when I look at mains electric, mains gas (as in gas, not gasoline), pump diesel and petrol, and converting it all to usable kWh units, it all comes in at the same number, to within a few %.

Intellectually, this stands to reason, if someone came along and set up a utility that could supply unlimited kWh in the form of lego bricks of unobtanium, whereby the cost per supplied kWh plus the cost of the "transformer" (eg propane powered electricity generator to convert propane to electricity) plus conversion efficiency was basically half of what is available today, world + dog would beat a path to their door and sign multi-year contracts.

Over the long term, mine cost about $0.30 per mile. Fuel is somewhere around $0.15 per mile. I drive my car about 50k miles per year, so that gives me another $7500 per year to work with. That is enough to maintain the car in good running condition indefinitely (including the occasional major repair). The current GAO/IRS mileage allowance is $0.50 per mile, so I'm doing OK. ;)

The GAO doesn't publish the basis of their rate, but it appears to represent the cost of buying a mid-priced car new (maybe $30-40k) and replacing it after about 100k miles, or the cost of leasing a similar car. I don't believe you could stay within their rate buying/leasing a new Benz every few years.

The OP actually raises some interesting questions...

Energy comes, basically, in two forms, high density and low density, low density is solar, high density is diesel, getting "useful work in meaningful quantities" out of low density energy is hard work, and costs a lot of money. Getting useful work out of high density energy is cheap and easy and convenient.

I find money also comes in two forms.

Smart money and dumb money.

"Depreciation" is dumb money.

Admittedly fuel here in the UK is incredibly expensive compared to almost anywhere else (though in real terms, the adjusted cost per kWh has been remarkably constant for decades) but even so, the capital cost of my current vehicle represents approximately ten full tankfuls of diesel.

That diesel energy / money, once consumed, is of course gone forever.

The capital cost I might get back.

I am a tightwad, I buy and run cheap vehicles, my criterion for a vehicle are simple.

1/ I must be able to turn they key, day or night, and go any distance I choose, subject to having the cost of the fuel required. (Before you americans start talking about itty bitty little islands, I have driven to Greece and back, Russia and back, Portugal and back (all more than once) and a little realised fact is that the mediterrenean is closer / less miles away than the north of scotland)

2/ I do not mind routine planned maintenance, but apart from a puncture I will not tolerate breakdowns of any kind.

3/ I do not like annual (MoT test) running repairs, 2 days garage labour is more than I paid for my current car, 1 days garage labour is more than I normally pay for a car, so all potential work is viewed from a throwing good money after bad perspective.

4/ There is an unavoidable "base load" cost before I ever turn the key, MoT (an annual vehicle safety test), Road Tax (an annual road use taxation) and insurance (compulsory) and even for me, thanks to my age and clean history and low value cars minimising it, this base load cost is around about 5 bucks a day, or 2.5 litres of pump diesel.

5/ the intangible.

#5 is the one that really makes the choices, even though #5 is the "dumb money" one and all the others are arguably the "smart money" ones.

#5 understands that most of my fuel is consumed in local urban traffic, and I could make significant savings by driving a lightweight 1.2 litre diesel econobox.

but.

I actually like wafting around in silence and comfort, rarely hitting the high side of 1,500 RPM, sure, I might be burning fuel at double the rate of the econobox, but I don't drive that much, I'm not in a taxi.

unusually for a european, I think anyone who drives a manual in city traffic needs their bumps felt, auto boxes add to the wafting around feeling of peace and calm.

once you're on the "open" road or motorways, you don't change gear much anyway (not if you want to keep your licence, there is no need to change gear all the time if not driving aggressively... japanese motorcycle owners and always changing gear, when in fact any big jap bike will pull quite happily in top gear at any speed from 20 mph to eeek) so more waftiness.

My car immediately prior to this merc was a 1.9 litre 4 pot citroen diesel, ultra basic, didn't even have power steering. It felt every bump and contour in the road, city driving was constant accelerator / brake / clutch / gearbox, and you knew you were in an diesel econobox.

"base load" costs were identical to the merc.

Fuel costs were half.

But again, I just don't burn that much fuel that doubling my fuel cost hurts me that much.

And the fact is, I find the extra fuel burned, and the extra money spent, worth it, for the time I am in the vehicle, because I waft around in comfort and silence except for a faint 6 cylinder burble from the exhaust.

On paper, as transport, the citroen did everything the current merc does, gets me from A to B at will, but then ALL my vehicles have done that.

In reality, I am prepared to pay a premium on dumb money, ain't never getting it back, dissipated out the exhaust pipe, energy, in order to get the relaxed waftiness and silence and comfort. It has to be said, my merc is cheaper than getting the bus.

If all I cared about was cost of ownership, I have two motorcycles under tarps, a 1,000 cc vee twin that will return 60 mpg, and a 125 cc honda that will top 100 mpg with ease, both also have dramatically reduced "base load" costs compared to a car... and the odd times I need to move something too bulky for a bike, or more than 1 passenger, I can simply borrow or hire a car.

Or, I could walk, this city is about 45 minutes walking time from one side to the other, green fields to green fields.

So getting back to the OP and cost of ownership per mile.

Within certain limits of affordability (not having a 100k sticker price car, plus hire purchase costs, not having a 100 miles each way daily commute) cost per mile or cost of ownership isn't usually the deciding factor.

Cost per mile per unit of personal comfort and relaxation is the deciding factor... provided that that cost is still within my personal budget.

I think that if shertex takes into account the cost of his capital investment in the Honda ($26k), the old 300D will be well in front. To date the final value of the car has not been considered either. What is an 8 yo Honda worth? What is the 300D worth? If you have the 300D in 8 years & you have driven it 134k miles, you can then compare. You didnt pay $26k for the 300D.

The local motoring organization (RACV) down here publishes comparative figures each year for a range of different cars, from micros to large SUV's & gives the proper running costs. They range from 30c/km ~50c/mile to about $1 /mile for large expensive ones.

Its interesting that a figure of 50c per mile has been quoted. The tax office in Australia lets us claim 50c per km ~ 80c /mile. Craig's fuel cost per mile is closer to our per kilometer cost for fuel.
I have just been working on some numbers for a workers compensation claim & the insurance company allows 30c/kilometer ~ 50c /mile, they claim that they only pay the incremental cost, not fixed costs. The joke is they pay $120 for a 400km trip, & if you go by train, its relaxing, it costs you $36 for the trip.
Craig is well infront because he has little cost of capital, its all just running costs.

Exactly, the major cost for most people is depreciation (the cost of replacing the vehicle periodically). If I bought a car for $30k, drove it for 100k miles, and sold it for $10k; I would be spending $0.20/mile for depreciation alone. If I did the same with a $60k car and kept it for 200k miles, I would be spending $0.25/mile for depreciation. In my case, my car only cost about $7-8k when I bought it over 10 years ago so depreciation is not a factor, that frees up more than enough money to do whatever it takes to maintain the car indefinitely (in exchange for a $0.25/mile depreciation allowance, I could replace my engine once per year).

My lowest cost per mile auto that i have ever owner was my 94 Buick Roadmaster. I paid $5800 in 2000 for it, and put 95,000 miles on it. 6.1 cents per mile, Average mpg over this time has been 23, at 90% + highway. 4130 gallons of fuel or 11 cents per mile. Repairs over this time, 2 rear shocks @ 45, 2 sets of front brakes @12 and 17, (still on original rears), 1 set of tires @ $436(Michelin X radials installed at 85,000 miles still have tread), 1 tune up $425(expensive cap, rotor, wires, plugs @ 110,000), Water pump at tune up preventative @ $80 and 1 radiator @ $135. $1150 spent on maintanance items, doing all work myself. 1.2 cents per mile.

total cost assuming zero residual value = 18.3 cents per mile. No wonder so many taxi cabs were Chevy Caprice.

This car is now used only in the winter, so that my 87 300D can be parked over the salt season. But, I expect it to be on the road another ten years, or 80,000 miles. What will the cents per mile be at the end?

Regardless of what anyone's personal views are on Detroit iron, Ford and GM always could make a good RWD sedan. Caprice, Roadmaster, Crown Vic, Grand Marquis were incredibly well built to rack on mile after mile at low cost.
Fuel economy with a V8 in the mid 20s. I have got as good as 27 MPG with the Roadmaster. Never got less than 20 mpg with any fillup.

If I was interested in getting the absolute minimum cost per mile, I would buy a small 5-10 year old, 100-150k mile, domestic/ricer POS with rough cosmetics and a decent drive train for $3-5k and drive it with minimum required maintenance until it needed a major repair. Then I would scrap/sell it for $500 and repeat the process. The only problem is you are constantly driving a piece of crap that may break down, but it's cheap.

I felt that way for one winter. Two years ago i bought a 93 Saturn sedan for the winter. 5 speed manual for good fuel economy, $800. I hated that thing by the end of winter and i sold it for $800. I guess that qualifies as my lowest cost per mile transportation, but that car was too small for me. Never again, but it was reliable.

what he said. it trumps fuel cost, insurance, ....at least in the first 4 years.

Wod,
Just curious. Is that the strategy a lot of people do in the cold north? So when does the MB start and stop its hibernation?

The other factor to consider is what else could be done with the $26k cost of the Honda over the $3-5k cost of a used 123. If that money went into a downpayment on a rental property, the difference could be quite substantial.

I drive my 87 300D until the first snow that gets salted. Then in March I take it back out. If we get March snowfall, then I always wash it the next day and get an underbody flush. I hope to get another ten years out of it.

You can make cars last in the rust belt by washing them nearly every day, but it adds up quickly. Some will oil the underbodies every fall.

Firstly, you left out the price you paid for the Mercedes-Benzes.

And, you must add ALL dollars spent on each vehicle, including it's purchase price, sales tax, interest paid annually on loans, insurance costs, annual licensing, tax levies - EVERYTHING.

Also, it's not anywhere near fair to compare a new Honda (less than 10 years old) with automobiles nearing 20 years of age in repair costs. Not to me anyway.

No. Most people do not have multiple cars to drive any time of the year, anywhere in the country. Multiple car ownership is a function of a collector. It's not necessarily cost saving owning multiple vehicles. It usually costs them more per mile collectively than owning just one.

Would suggest you run the numbers on all your cars. In total ownership costs per mile, your numbers would be on the Moon, versus single car operation.

Unfortunately, strictly operating costs tell you nothing about turnkey ownership costs.

The OP's post is totally flawed insofar as what he/she thinks they're getting at.

Simply NOT enough information to give a complete or concise answer.

I hadn't thought about the cost of capital....trying to think, back in 2002, what the foregone opportunity might have been. Interest rates were certainly higher. Also, for a brief period, we financed the vehicle....but paid it off after two years.

However, wouldn't cost of capital apply with both the Honda and the MB? Granted, the more front-end loaded (as in the case of the Honda) the outlay, the higher the cost.

Re depreciation (which several posts have mentioned), isn't that "cost" accounted for in original purchase price? I guess I'm not thinking of my cars as assets with resale value....plan to keep both indefinitely.

Re current value, the Honda is certainly higher.

In today's market, I wouldn't worry too much about the cost of capital. It is a consideration for large amounts of money, but the potential ROI for $20-30k over a few years is pretty tiny these days.

my 87 TD has full maintenance records in it... 46K OPP, 23K current repair costs. my parts on the wagon so far. 191K on the clock... what's that make my cost per mile...

Whatever your total cost out of pocket is for everything, divided by miles.

Comparing any car's cost per mile is fine, but you have to have all out of pocket totalled to make it accurate.

Operating costs
 

All four owners (including us) of our '96 E300D have kept track of expenses and I have a spreadsheet summing it all up. It's likely that a few items have been missed but I think the majority of the money has been captured. Over 14 years and 274,000 miles (average 20,000 miles/year), a total of $25,123.34 has been spent on maintenance. That works out to US$0.09 per mile, not covering fuel (US$0.12/mile for B20 biodiesel), licensing (US$154/year), full coverage insurance (US$636/year), or depreciation. [These are all 2010 California numbers, YMMV.]

Although the POs drove the car quite a bit, we are driving only about 8,000 miles a year. This stretches out the service intervals and makes it harder to compare costs with those who drive more. For example, I like to change engine oil at least once a year, even though the Mobil-1 is probably still good after only 8,000 miles.

When I look at maintenance costs, I end up with several categories and am never sure which ones to include when I'm trying to compare. For example,

1. Routine maintenance performed once or more a year (oil changes, air filters).
2. Routine maintenance performed once every two or more years (transmission fluid and filter, coolant, brake fluid, etc.).
3. Necessary repairs or replacements (things that wear out or break over the course of years -- batteries, brake pads, tires).
4. Stuff that the POs never got around to fixing, that the car came to us needing and that I went ahead and repaired (engine mounts, shocks).
5. Stuff that I fixed or installed because I wanted to, the car was OK without it (dents, Scangauge).

Jeremy

Only 9 cents a mile is pretty impressive. If I might ask, to what extent did you and other owners do your own labor?

What did you pay for each one of the two Mercedes-Benz?

We know what you paid for the Honda, but not the Benzes.

I would have a hard time as to the accuracy of any previous owner's out of pocket costs on any car I bought used. What they paid is irrelevant anyway for what you are out of pocket per mile once you start your own calculation scale. Besides, the time-capsule cost of any vehicle will be vastly different for numerous cost factoring circumstances. And they are all specific to that timeframe..

"$636 annually for full insurance coverage" doesn't sound right to me. I'm wondering how your policy reads?

The only way to determine what any vehicle costs you in it's entirety - is after you sell it.

It is not only inaccurate, but it bears no comparison to reality trying to compare a 10 year old Honda, with 20 year old MBs. Especially when you still have them all on the road. Any one of the three could blow an engine tomorrow, and today's cost would bear zilch semblance to the same car's cost factor in just 24 hours.

The only way I calculate cost per mile is by the car, and after it gets sold.

The only thing you should be aware of while driving it - is the cost of fuel (mpg) period...

1991 300D in 2009, 77,000 miles, $4500.

1992 300D in 2003, 137,000 miles, $5900.

Labor Day
 

The first owner in Portland, OR (200,000 miles) limited himself to putting diesel in the tank. The dealer did everything else including :D resetting the clock for daylight savings time. :D I have all of the receipts. It was a business write-off for him so he didn't care what it cost. $13,000 of the $25,000 or $0.065/mile was spent under his ownership.

Owners 2 (Portland) and 3 (SF Bay area), (25,000 miles each), apparently did simple jobs themselves (oil changes) but hired out the more difficult stuff like changing glow plugs (difficult to them, maybe). They tended to skimp on maintenance, as used-car owners often due; their total of about $4,000 works out to $0.08/mile.

Owner #4 (25,000 miles so far, me) does everything he possibly can himself. I have let my mechanic do a couple of jobs like replacing the serpentine belt tensioner - I have to give him a little business! The transmission rebuild ($2,900 of the $25,000 total) was done by a local shop. All of the inherited dings and dents were removed by a local scratch and dent place ($450).

I have done everything else myself. The only "significant" (over $100) repairs I've had to do were to replace the motor mounts, shocks, starter motor, and ignition switch and to rebuild the crankcase vent system. My total of about $8,000 in 25,000 miles includes the transmission and several things the 2nd and 3rd owners should have done. That works out to $0.32/mile, by far the highest cost per mile of the four owners.

Clearly, I could have reduced my expenses. If I had kept my fingers in my pockets instead of putting Mobil-1 in the transmission, I would not have exacerbated the slight front pump seal leak and could have gotten (according to the rebuilder) another 50,000 miles out of the transmission. The dents were not hurting anyone. The OEM Boge shocks actually were still good at 250,000 miles :eek:. Etc, etc.

It's my personal problem to want a car that is close to perfect. That tends to make my expenses higher than they could be. Since I enjoy working on things, the maintenance tends to be fun and I "write it off" as a hobby. YMMV.

Jeremy

Insurance
 

Yes, insurance costs vary all over the map (literally); there are major variations from one part of the country to another, plus personal variations, driving record, etc. Our policy covers my wife and myself with my wife the primary driver of the '96. Does $636/year sound high or low to you? [The insurance on my '87 has a slightly lower premium due to its lower value.]

By "full coverage" I mean
(a) $250,000/$500,000/$100,000 liability (the maximum)
(b) collision with a $500 deductible
(c) comprehensive with no deductible
(d) uninsured motorist $100,000/$300,000 liability
(e) uninsured motorist property damage
(f) emergency road service

We are at their "superior driver rate level" and get (they say) discounts for
(a) multiple line (State Farm also has our homeowners' policy)
(b) multicar
(c) driving safety record (never a chargeable accident)
(d) California good driver (whatever that means)
(e) loyalty (40+ years with State Farm)

Jeremy

That's interesting about exacerbating the tranny leak. I had thought about switching to synthetic at one point....glad I didn't.

Dumb mistake
 

It wasn't that I wasn't warned - one of the dealer service sheets from the first owner noted a small leak from the front pump seal at about 150,000 miles (no action was taken). But at 250,000 miles I went ahead and changed to Mobil-1 anyway. It would have been fine on a younger transmission.

After I changed fluid, filter, and gasket, it started leaving a teaspoon-full of Mobil-1 on the garage floor under the front of the transmission after it was driven (I had left the belly panel off). I changed back to dino-based fluid but the leak remained. After I was sure it wasn't going away, I took the car to a local shop recommended by my mechanic and they went through the transmission.

All of the "hard" parts were good so they replaced only the "wear" parts (clutch packs, etc.), gaskets, and seals. That's why it cost "only" $2900. The mechanic said that the old wear parts would have been good for about 50,000 additional miles or 300,000 miles out of the original transmission parts.

Interestingly, I also put Mobil-1 5W-40 in the engine and it doesn't leak at all. My mechanic says that synthetic oils have shorter molecular chains than dino oils so the synthetics can leak out of smaller gaps in seals and gaskets. The tranny shop put dino fluid in the rebuilt transmission and I think I'll keep it that way.

Jeremy

I bought the 78 SD for $2500. I've spent about $700 over the last 4 years, including tires for her. I've driven it just over 40,000 miles, so that's about 12.5/mile.

I'm good with that!

Seems like it might have been cheaper to replace the transmission with a reman. Part can be had for 1850 including shipping. My time will come, so it's something I think about....

I too have had great success with M1 5w40.

True costs of ownership or cost/mile
 

You need to add the costs of ownership into the equation, i.e. insurance, road tax, monthly payment, maintenance and depreciation into the equation. This is FIXED costs for driving 1 mile per year or 50K miles per year. In State like CT, I think they have property tax for owning a vehicle - you need to include that as well.

Then you need to add the running costs - diesel or gas whatever the case may be. That is your true running costs for the mileage. If you are want to be really clever, then you can work out the 'lost of opportunties' costs if you had invested the same money elsewhere. I don't want to get there myself.

If it comes out to be less then 50 cents per mile then you are ahead of the game as per the IRA rate chart below. You may find it to be very close to the official figure unless you have an old banger more than 10 year old.

"Beginning on Jan. 1, 2010, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (also vans, pickups or panel trucks) will be:

50 cents per mile for business miles driven
16.5 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes
14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations"

Rebuild local vs. install a re-man?
 

It depends on the labor cost where you live, the source of the remanufactured transmission, and the time factor. It took about a week, maybe a couple of days more, to have our transmission rebuilt and back in place. A re-man would have taken several days less but we weren't in a hurry. For someone on the road, time may be a major factor. Clearly, the cheap way would be to buy a used transmission (or a wreck with a good tranny) and install it yourself.

One of the best local rebuilders is Peter Schmid in Burlingame, south of San Francisco. IMHO, rebuilders are always "on the clock" and don't give the units as much individual attention as a local mechanic rebuilding one box at a time. Schmid's web site doesn't give price information so I can't quote a dollar figure other than to note that a rebuilt transmission buyer will have to pay sales tax (getting close to 10% now) plus shipping both ways (return of the core). Depending on location, one might save a few bucks by picking up the re-man and delivering the core at the same time.

If you can R&R the transmission yourself, so much the better. Here in California, R&R labor costs are such that there is little or no savings in buying a re-man. Plus, I know the guy who rebuilt my unit; he will always stand behind his work regardless of miles or warranty language.

The price breakdown for our tranny (in December 2007) was $1841.40 for labor (including R&R) plus $966.77 in parts (including a rebuilt torque converter) plus sales tax, then "only" 8%. Supplies, disposal, and state environmental fees (subtotal $25) brought the grand total to $2910.51.

Jeremy

What are you guessing/hoping the life expectancy of your rebuilt transmission will be?

Hi, Shertex,

The only way I know of to accurately calculate what a vehicle costs per mile are in two segments.

1) is the mpg you get on average to drive the car in STRICTLY OUT-OF-POCKET fuel costs.

OR

2) the total out-of-pocket of the car divided into the miles driven. Regardless of how many miles the car had on it when you bought it.

The only accurate per mile out-of-pocket calculation dictates all costs divided by miles.

How old or new a car is makes no difference in calculating that cost per mile.

The guy (fool) that plumps down $43,500.00 for a new EClass Mercedes-Benz, and drives it 1,000 miles and still owns it - just paid $43.50, plus fuel costs per mile. You need to be more specific when doing "cost per mile" calculations, or it's apples 'n watermellons.

My method is a bit quick and dirty, hence the sole focus on purchase price and repairs....and I'm more interested in the comparative than the absolute. Fuel costs these days are comparable (MB gets better mileage, but diesel costs more); insurance, inspections, etc. are the same....so those things cancel out. My hope is that owning an old MB is not unreasonable cost-wise....so far, I think I'm in good shape.

To me, you have ideal years of Mercedes-Benz diesel-powered autos. You are a rock star - hero to me for the MB auto decisions.

I believe you are good to go with your owning the outstanding Honda mini-van. Basically - you're in the cat bird seat!


The only negative in owning/driving old cars is that they breakdown more frequently versus new cars.

New cars are under warranty and old cars aren't

How old a car one owns is a personal financial decision.

At the age of 48 I realized that it was stupid to buy most any vehicle new - even if it's purchase price made no difference in your lifestyle. There is no getting over throwing tens of thousands of dollars away on a new Mercedes-Benz. How do I know? Because I was that guy paying cash for a new Mercedes diesel. I'm not that stupid anymore.

+1

BS - old car causes less to insure, less depreciation, less in tax. It may cause a bit more to maintain but is not enough to offset depreciation.

You are sooo modest.

Having had my share of old cars devoured by rust, my two '80s diesels are more hobby/second cars than everyday drivers. They do serve to take some of the wear & tear off my 'work' vehicle - a '98 Nissan Altima.
However, while cost-per-mile may be a standard, for me it isn't a fair measurement as I just don't annually put many thousands of miles on my diesels.
I prefer to compare my vehicles in terms of cost per month or year.

Happy Motoring, Mark

It's 4th grade arithmetic. Some don't grasp understanding simple equations.



Take another shot at your comprehension here.



+1

I agree - I am the man!

That's IN BOLD the only way to reconcile anything versus taking the bus or walking/bicycle.

I am on-track to drive my MB diesel car, perhaps no more than 2K miles a year. Down from a whopping 3K per year miles.

quote
Skid Row Joe
"$43.50 + fuel + insurance per mile" is hard to justify in a car's 1st 1,000 miles for instance... Owning it for a decade plus - no problemo!

For me fuel is the largest cost at ~6-12c/mile. Insurance/reg/smog are about 5c/mile, and repair/maintenance costs (mostly DIY except for tires and sometimes brakes) are ~2+c/mile.

Those Detroit models are the closest equivalents to the MB diesels many of us drive. In essence these models (both MB and US) are all fleet vehicles. Perform the scheduled maintenance and watch the miles roll by.

You quit driving at dusk?:D

The more you drive the more you amortize your fix costs - I take it back, money is not an issue here.

I bought my car 7.5 years ago and have driven it just under 100k since then....total spent is probably in the 12k range....but I am anal obsessive about maintenance. Most people cannot drive an S-class for 7+ years for 12k.....so I think I'm not doing too bad.

300E has been good too, had it for just over 2 years and have driven it about 23k.....total into it, maybe 5.5k.......but its in excellent shape and has half the miles of the W126....so I also think thats not too bad.

Best part, I have two MB's in the garage in excellent working order, no car payment, and very low insurance and maintenance costs.

:D


My dad/brother have done well with their W123 and W126's......my sister has had to spend a bit to get the 190E up to snuff mechanically, but the purchase price was awesome for a car in such good physical shape (1500). She's probably just under 3.5k into it and has had it a year or so...driven it only about 3,000 miles. :eek: She only drives about 75 miles a week.

A year and a half after my original post, numbers are holding steady:

2002 Honda Odyssey purchased new, currently 150,000 miles, cost of ownership (defined as purchase price plus maintenance): 21.9 cents per mile.

1992 300D, purchased with 137,000 miles now 233,000 miles, cost of ownership: 25.6 cents per mile.

More significant are maintenance costs per mile above 100,000 miles for the Honda (6.2 cents) and since purchase for the Benz (19.0 cents).

But if you ask which is more fun to drive, the answer is of course easy. ;)

I suspect if you added in fuel costs the Benz could catch the Honda.

Yep. It's a 7 cent per mile differential using today's fuel prices. So once I throw in fuel costs, the Benz is cheaper.

Maintenance alone I'm well in the hole on my "investment". A lot of it was stuff I was picky about and wanted fixed due to the experiences I've had with my Dodge. But 11,000 dollars later, at least all the car needs now is the seats fixed up a bit. Anyone who disputes how much I've spent, I've got the maintenance records/parts purchase receipts to prove it. It's an astronomical number.

...For the record, it was worth it:cool: