Question Why to buy a new car?

[SiberianTiger]

Depends on your necessities. Public transportation is fine when you only have to move within the city (provided the city you live in has a good PT network) and you only need to travel during the normal service times. Moreover, in case you need to commute, the schedules might arranged in such a way you might take the better part of a day to do something which would have taken you half an hour. And if you're not, like me, working 9 to 5 but have to adjust your own schedules to fit the job, it might be next to impossible.
And I'm not even mentioning buying supplies and having to carry them on the bus...

It's even better to work within a 20 minutes walk from your home, which I did over the past 10 years, not counting the last two - of course your lifestyle is mostly defined by the opportunities you have and your environment. For such a city rat as myself, having a car only makes sense about twice a year - for the need you mentioned in the last sentence.

 

[Eagle]

Thanks for the tip Zachstar, I've heard some good things about the Yaris.

If I were going to buy a new American car that was just for fun driving right now I would get a Dodge Challenger. Those are the coolest-looking and they are pretty quick. Real old-school muscle car look. [[Good Looking picture]]

*Whistles* That is a beauty. Dodge makes pretty good cars, I'll have to check that out.

Looks like I'll have to visit some dealerships in the next few weeks.

 

[Andy44]

It's even better to work within a 20 minutes walk from your home, which I did over the past 10 years, not counting the last two - of course your lifestyle is mostly defined by the opportunities you have and your environment. For such a city rat as myself, having a car only makes sense about twice a year - for the need you mentioned in the last sentence.

Well, it's very telling that you name yourself a "city rat". If you've only ever lived in cities, it's easy to believe that owning a car is nothing but a liability. I have known friends and relatives in New York City who have never learned to drive, let alone even owned a car.

But the percentage of land in the United States which is well-served by public transportation is VERY tiny. Even in many cities, public transportation takes forever to get you anywhere, because the buses or trains run too infrequently, or make too many stops along the way. Many suburban areas don't have any public transport at all, and in those that do, only limited service.

People who complain about widespread car ownership are usually city-dwellers and simply don't understand that without a car, your freedom of movement is severely limited, especially for those who live out in the countryside, where the nearest food store is miles away. Worse, you can't always pick where your job is relative to where you live. Living within walking distance of work is the ideal, but its not always possible because of the way things are laid out.

 

[movieman]

For me, the question is: why to buy a car at all if you can use a public transportation?

Car to work: fifteen minutes. Bus to work: fifteen minutes walk to the bus stop and then forty-five minutes on the bus. Or five minutes walk to bus stop, followed by thirty minutes on the bus followed by five minutes wait at the bus station followed by ten minutes on the second bus. In either case, add another five to ten minutes waiting at the bus stop before the bus arrives.

So driving saves more than an hour and a half per day, including about half an hour out in the snow at -40C. No contest.

And I have a 'good' bus service here.


-----Post Added-----

It's even better to work within a 20 minutes walk from your home

Maybe that was possible in the 19th century, but today it's hard enough for one person to find a job within 20 minutes walk of where they live, and almost impossible for two people in the same house to do so unless they're in low-end low-skilled work (basic retail, etc).

And what if you lose your job? Are going to sell your house and buy a new one near where your new job is? Even if the houses cost the same, the transaction costs (lawyer fees, taxes, etc) could buy you a used car.

The whole idea of 'well, we should just live near where we work' is a fantasy that can only work for a small fraction of people in a modern economy.

 

[GregBurch]

Oh good! A chance to be controversial and divisive! Mass transit? Some of my thoughts on the topic from a few years ago:

http://www.gregburch.net/cars/plans.html

 

[Urwumpe]

http://www.gregburch.net/cars/plans.html

I think your "more roads are needed" argument fails on one important aspect:
Roads can only carry a limited amounts of cars. When you approach this limit, you get higher chances of jams, at the limit, you will be jammed.

Speed does not help you much, it just increases the chances for jams, in the moment you have just one slow driver on the road.

The European affection for tram systems is simple cold math: One tram system can transport more people per hour, as a similar large road, even assuming you have all cars transporting as many people (5-7) as they could.

Of course Europe is not the USA. Our cities needed some urban renewal after 1945. Our cities are also not drawn on a grid, we have more historically grown concentric circles, which are easy to use for ring topologies.

We have also a system called "Park&Ride"... ... which seems to be invented in your home country.

I was impressed lately how good P&R can work... for the first time visited the new arena here, and used P&R, even though I only live 6 km away (Living in a village = one bus per hour in each direction). They used a chain of omnibuses to transport the people from and to the P&R lot - and really a chain. When one bus left, a empty one arrived.


I think some train systems are sure not bad - who says that you can't have both, cars and trains? The trick is not to create a monopoly, but to make the more effective public transport so attractive (though it is naturally ugly for a freedom loving person), that enough people use it for lowering the traffic densities.

 

[Eagle]

I was able to spend some time living on Long Island this summer with a friend. The city was awesome and I loved the subway.

The thing there is not that you can't have a car, is that there's nowhere to park it. Taxi was definitely the fastest way to get around, but quite expensive. I suppose its affordable if you only take a taxi to work and back home again, and have a high paying job. Gonna have to have a good job to live there anyways.

It took about 5 min to get into the subway. Up to 15 min waiting on a train (longer if there's a delay or problem), and about 3-4 min between stops.

If you're staying on Long Island the time to take the subway isn't much shorter than if you sprinted on the surface... but still.

 

[movieman]

I think your "more roads are needed" argument fails on one important aspect:
Roads can only carry a limited amounts of cars. When you approach this limit, you get higher chances of jams, at the limit, you will be jammed.

The same applies to railways, but that doesn't stop people demanding more railways. If the roads are jammed and it's not due to poor road design (e.g. uncorrelated stop lights), then you need more roads; you may not be able to build more if the jams are occurring in a town, but not building more roads isn't going to make the situation any better.

Speed does not help you much, it just increases the chances for jams, in the moment you have just one slow driver on the road.

Speed is pretty much irrelevant, since the maximum safe carrying capacity of a road is around one car every two seconds per lane; less separation is dangerous, more separation is wasteful.

The European affection for tram systems is simple cold math: One tram system can transport more people per hour, as a similar large road, even assuming you have all cars transporting as many people (5-7) as they could.

Trams are just buses that can't control where they're going...

I think some train systems are sure not bad - who says that you can't have both, cars and trains?

Passenger trains are only economical when they're heavily used, which is probably why most countries which have a lot of passenger trains also have big subsidies; if I remember correctly the UK, for example, subsidises the railway and also allows train companies to reclaim most or all of the tax they pay on fuel... yet train tickets still cost far more per mile than driving.

 

[Urwumpe]

Passenger trains are only economical when they're heavily used, which is probably why most countries which have a lot of passenger trains also have big subsidies; if I remember correctly the UK, for example, subsidises the railway and also allows train companies to reclaim most or all of the tax they pay on fuel... yet train tickets still cost far more per mile than driving.

That is mostly an organisational problem... We have the same situation in Germany, with too much money being not spend for keeping the stuff running.

 

[Andy44]

Oh good! A chance to be controversial and divisive! Mass transit? Some of my thoughts on the topic from a few years ago:

http://www.gregburch.net/cars/plans.html

LOL Greg as soon as I saw your name at the bottom of the screen in this thread I knew something like this was forthcoming!

I read an article in Liberty magazine in which the author had done a little research on the Katrina distaster in New Orleans and found that citizens who had cars had left the danger zone, while those who relied solely on public transportation were left in the lurch.

The car gives the individual the ability to go where he wants when he wants, and as you wrote, in most places it gives him the only way to get there. I currently reside in the DC area and the Metro system, which is both trains and buses, is very heavily used, especially at rush hour. But I-95 and the Beltway are packed with cars despite this, and the rail system cannot come close to providing the volume necessary to replace all those cars. Metro even has "Park & Ride" lots as Urwumpe says, and they do help, but you still need to drive to them if you're in the suburbs. ETA: Parking in a Metro lot has become more expensive than the train fare itself recently, so why shouldn't we just drive, anyway?

All that said, I think it's important to remember that highways in the US, particularly the Interstate highways, are heavily subsidized by federal, state, and local governments. This, along with federal policies subsidizing home ownership and housing projects, is what led to suburban sprawl, the death of many New York City neighborhoods, and the destruction of the passenger rail service. Because trucks also drive on these subsudized roads, it almost destroyed the freight train business as well, since railroads in the US are almost all privately owned, but freight rail bounced back and is stronger than ever. Because of all this, which was caused by the same pin-headed planners who hate cars, rail service cannot match private car ownership for ease and convenience of transport.

[Whew! Maybe this should be a new thread...]

 

[Torgo]

I live in New Jersey, about a 45 minute car ride from Manhattan (assuming no traffic).
I live less than a mile from a major train hub that goes either right into mid-town, or to the Hoboken terminal which allows for easier trips into lower Manhattan.

Before I 'rescued' her, my wife lived in Flushing, Queens. To get to her tiny little cave of an apartment via public transport meant a walk to the train station trying to arrive not too long before the train departed. A 1.5 hour train ride into Manhattan Penn Station, then either a LIRR train to about a half mile from her place, or a transfer to the subway and then a train change in the subway. If I took the LIRR, it was the wait for the train +45 minutes for the trip. If I took the subway it was about +75 minutes for the trip (and a savings of about 8 bucks). All in all, public transport took at least 3 hours each way(figuring the walks and waits), and cost about $25 per trip.

Driving, when there is little to no traffic, takes me about an hour each way, tolls cost $19 round trip, and costs about $5 in gas. I parked in her apartment's garage, or found a spot on the street (on those days when miracles were happening.).

I value my time and flexibility.

So - 6 hours for $25, or 2 hours for $24. The choice was very, very easy for me.

Back when I worked in the city, I took the train in. The train schedule was decently matched enough to my work schedule. The cost per trip was less than the cost of driving, tolls and parking. Even the time (1.5 hours) was usually about the same as driving and having to fight traffic. There was even a tax credit my employer got for having us use a transit plan (we also saved on fares).

Mass Transit is only an viable alternative when the cost and convenience meet or beat what you can get when driving.

 

[simonpro]

Well, comparing the base price I find with a quick search of base models, I get $46,805 for the 'vette and $66,500 for the Carrera. Stock, the base 911 was hauling 9.7 pounds per horsepower, while the Vette beat that at 9.2. In terms of grunt, the difference is even greater, with the 911 having 258 lb/ft of torque, while the Vette had 375. I haven't dyno'ed my car, but I would say conservatively that it's got an additional 25 ponies than it did when it was stock, which would push it down to 8.6 lbs/hp. The Vette, despite having a much bigger motor (5.7 liters vs. 3.4) also gets slightly better gas mileage.

Actually I'd forgotten that there's a lot fo import duty ont he Porsche in the USA, which means a 'Vette is priced cheaper than a bottom of the range porsche. Here it's priced more similarly to the high performance 911 Turbo. The 911 Turbo costs about $355000 here, the 'Vette C5 Z06 is about $320000 (although there's only one on sale in the country just now).

The 'Vette will truly pulverise the 911 in a straight line and actually almost competes with some supercars in those stakes. I'm not entirely sure how the 'Vette is so fast over the 1/4 mile (it does have an American engine after all ) but it does the job. Show it some corners and the 911 will come out on top though, the Carerra is about equal to the 'Vette around the Nurburgring, the 911 Turbo substantially faster. So it's impossible to say which is the better car from a logical perspective, so you have to go with whatever you like better. That's how it should be.

I'd take the 'Vette though, the styling and comfort is much better than the 911. IMO all Porsche's are very conservative in their styling, which annoys me.

(Simon, I know you've got some respect for my ride, so that last bit of snark is not intended for you.)

Yeah, I do like that car. I had a go in one last year when in the states, and it's superb fun. You can really throw the things around and they stick pretty well.


-----Post Added-----

My Ferrari F40 can easily outperform them, as long as the batteries are fresh and there's only one hamster riding.

My car can probably outperform the F40. Not hard as the Ferrari is a little old now

My girlfriend's Buick has a 3.1 liter engine and doesn't seem to be any worse than my 1.8 liter Escort was on fuel consumption.

Fords are usually pretty terrible for mileage.

So - 6 hours for $25, or 2 hours for $24. The choice was very, very easy for me.

This is why Europeans will always find it hard to 'get' the American love of the car. I can go from the front door of my house in Copenhagen to the front door of my Girlfriend's house in Stockholm within 2 hours. America, and American cities, are just too big for that type of thing to work well.

 

[SiberianTiger]

I was able to spend some time living on Long Island this summer with a friend. The city was awesome and I loved the subway.

It took about 5 min to get into the subway. Up to 15 min waiting on a train (longer if there's a delay or problem), and about 3-4 min between stops.

Since I'm an experienced subway user here I can't help but ask: is it a kind of quiet section of the NY subway you are talking about? Here in Moscow, we have another subway train coming every 90-110 seconds, depending on whether it's a peak hours of not, and it's still quite crowded in the real peak hours. Getting a seat is a very rare occurrence for me, because I always let have one ladies, elderly people or children, if some are around (and ladies most typically are). And this rate of train service is ubiquitous through the entire M subway. There are also plans to supplement the subway system with a surface train ring, but I'm afraid that in the current economic situation they aren't going to come into life very soon.

All in all, I prefer going by rail over going by road whenever possible, even if I'm facing just a choice between a tram and a bus.

 

[Eagle]

Since I'm an experienced subway user here I can't help but ask: is it a kind of quiet section of the NY subway you are talking about? Here in Moscow, we have another subway train coming every 90-110 seconds, depending on whether it's a peak hours of not, and it's still quite crowded in the real peak hours. Getting a seat is a very rare occurrence for me, because I always let have one ladies, elderly people or children, if some are around (and ladies most typically are). And this rate of train service is ubiquitous through the entire M subway. There are also plans to supplement the subway system with a surface train ring, but I'm afraid that in the current economic situation they aren't going to come into life very soon.

All in all, I prefer going by rail over going by road whenever possible, even if I'm facing just a choice between a tram and a bus.

I think its the S line that takes a little bit of time. Basically the 123 lines run next to each other as do the 456 lines. The S line goes between the two. That is if I remember correctly.

A train in front of us broke down one day, so that might have skewed my perceptions.

 

[Linguofreak]

Since I'm an experienced subway user here I can't help but ask: is it a kind of quiet section of the NY subway you are talking about? Here in Moscow, we have another subway train coming every 90-110 seconds, depending on whether it's a peak hours of not, and it's still quite crowded in the real peak hours. Getting a seat is a very rare occurrence for me, because I always let have one ladies, elderly people or children, if some are around (and ladies most typically are). And this rate of train service is ubiquitous through the entire M subway. There are also plans to supplement the subway system with a surface train ring, but I'm afraid that in the current economic situation they aren't going to come into life very soon.

All in all, I prefer going by rail over going by road whenever possible, even if I'm facing just a choice between a tram and a bus.

Seems to me to be pretty close to what I saw on the Munich U-Bahns. Fast service, frequent trains (the Wikipedia article on the system says trains on each line every 5 minutes, with overlapping lines giving as little as 2 minutes between trains on overlapping segments), and the general ability to get anywhere in the city quickly with just your own two feet and a rail pass. The Munich rail system was an absolute delight to use and generally gives mass transit a good reputation. I'd gladly shell out extra tax dollars for such a system.

That's not what I saw on the Krakow tram lines that same summer. Those combined slow service with poor reliability. I recall something like three times in the two weeks we were there that we had to take a bus or walk because of a problem with a train up the line.

It's also not the experience I've had with American so called "rapid transit" systems. They are generally a bit more reliable than the Krakow trams, but service tends to be slow.

American rapid transit, and the Krakow trams, are a waste of taxpayer's money.

 

[V8Li]

There are quite a few 911s

I'd like a 911 996 Turbo
Classic

 

[RichWall]

I'd like a 911 996 Turbo
Classic

I second that

In the early 60s, we were promised jet-packs by now. What's up with that?

Or maybe a Stargate in every home...As long as it does not run on gasoline.

 

[James.Denholm]

In the early 60s, we were promised jet-packs by now. What's up with that?

You know, I just picked up a book about that sort of thing, by the name of "Hey, where's my jetpack?" I forget who it's by, but I'm getting it for Christmas... Anyway, to re-rail this here tram.

Has anyone here, preferably someone who uses their own city's public transport, tried out Japan's transport systems? I went there recently. Very well done, crowded, but incredibly reliable. Shinkansen + Kyoto bus system = Not much walking required to hotel room = :speakcool:

 

[Hielor]

Why to buy a new car now: With auto-makers having issues, and gas prices being very unstable, we may be nearing the death of the traditional sports car. Better grab one now.

For me, I'm waiting on the new Camaro Z28. If it seems to be taking too long I'll just pick up an SS, but yeah.

 

[Eagle]

Or maybe a Stargate in every home...As long as it does not run on gasoline.

Did you ever watch the show? Imagine the consequences with so many people misdialing every day! :weird: