| Cobra_R |
well i got a quote for 2 vehicles this is hypotheticly speaking btw
1997 5.4l f-150 xlt 2 wheeldrive. $1345 a year
1990 240 sx se 2.4l. $1867 a year
now split that down
240 sx $155 a month
F-150 $112 a month
now factor in gas 3840 a year thats roughly 80 dollars in a tank a week. for the f-150 thats a grand total of $5185. a year
now factor in gas for the 240 sx thats $1920 a year on gas which is 40 a week in the tank. also means a grand total of $ 3787 a year.
now if i plan on not useing the truck as in working. whats the point of having a gas guzzler for a first vehicle.
this is the argument i am presenting to my father. he wants me to get a truck to stay safe. i argue 240 sx because of gas insurance will drop and gas will rise as i age but right now i need to think economical. and he doesnt get that. |
|
|
| Jord@n |
I would say go for the car, since you will save a lot on gas.:dunno:
It's also easier to park, easier to maneuver and cheaper. |
|
|
| GOT BOOST |
quote:
Originally posted by Cobra_R
well i got a quote for 2 vehicles this is hypotheticly speaking btw
1997 5.4l f-150 xlt 2 wheeldrive. $1345 a year
1990 240 sx se 2.4l. $1867 a year
now split that down
240 sx $155 a month
F-150 $112 a month
now factor in gas 3840 a year thats roughly 80 dollars in a tank a week. for the f-150 thats a grand total of $5185. a year
now factor in gas for the 240 sx thats $1920 a year on gas which is 40 a week in the tank. also means a grand total of $ 3787 a year.
now if i plan on not useing the truck as in working. whats the point of having a gas guzzler for a first vehicle.
this is the argument i am presenting to my father. he wants me to get a truck to stay safe. i argue 240 sx because of gas insurance will drop and gas will rise as i age but right now i need to think economical. and he doesnt get that.
Hi Cobra_R,
What can I say other than WOW!!! I am impressed. You have done your research on the vehicles, fuel consumption and laid it out in terms of how much it will cost you per year. Also lay it out to him how much you would be saving over the year by driving the 240SX.
Nice work man! :thumbup:
I hope it works out for you.
Mike Nikolai |
|
|
| MX5 Miata Guy |
Since when is a truck safe?
The roll, the don't meet crash safety requirements, they have no traction in the back end, etc... |
|
|
| night_font |
| tell him this...if he wants you to get the truck and you want the car, tell him your argument about the gas and tell him he has to pay for all the gas that you use on the truck ..haha burn |
|
|
| TrevorK |
| Maybe he doesn't think you can handle driving a 240SX? |
|
|
| wubba_65 |
1. The 5.4 L in a RWD truck will present more difficulties when driving in traffic. More power and less weight to rear wheels = Easier smoke shows, easier to kick loose in corners, less traction in winter. Easily fixed by adding weight, but then gas mileage goes down.
2. Trucks do not roll easier when driven properly. I've owned 2 trucks and 1 full size SUV and taken them over some pretty extreme terrain, and cornered at some high speeds. Very stable, and didn't have any problems with them. If you DO roll them, trucks have less proection than a car because now you have an 8000 lb vehicle sitting over top of some very fragile sheet metal, which will crush easier than having a 3000 lb car over the same guage metal and structural support. (I don't know what 240's weigh, but generally speaking less than half of what a truck would weigh).
3. The Cost arguement is a very good one. If I was paying for my own ride, I'd argue with my dad as well, that if he wanted me to purchase a more expensive vehicle, with higher operating costs, I would want to have him pay the difference. It is Cobra_R's vehicle, and if he wants a car, and is paying for it, then he should be allowed to get what he wants.
4. Collision Crash test ratings ---> may not be good on an F150, but for lower speed collisions (under 30 km/h) there will be less damage to the truck than there would be to the car, especially front or rear impacts. You have Solid Frame construction Vs. Unibody, and some thick ass METAL bumpers vs Plastic. I don't know what it is like to get new bumpers from junkers, but Truck bumpers have 8 bolts, lots of spares lying in junk yards, and if worse came to worse, you could take it off and beat the fucker out until it looked half respectable (as I did with one of my trucks!!) Also, you have to look at the impact rating standards between the two years. A lot could have changed between 1990 and 1997. Also, the chances of a high speed impact are WAY lower than their low speek counterparts. Also, car standards vs. truck standards. Can't compare Apples to Beef. There is no comparisson.
5. I had a truck as my first vehicle (with a 454 no less). Back then gas was $0.48/L, and gas was still expensive, but I just used it around town (from Ft. Saskatchewan), with VERY rare trips to the city. I loved having a truck as a first vehicle, and I don't think it is a bad choice. But I can see the appeal of a 240.
My $0.02 |
|
|
| Billy |
quote:
Originally posted by MX5 Miata Guy
Since when is a truck safe?
The roll, the don't meet crash safety requirements, they have no traction in the back end, etc...
Exactly. In my last p/u truck I was rearended at a crosswalk. Truck folded like an accordian. I was hit so hard that my truck got slammed forward into a Sunfire ahead of me which surprisingly didn't take any damage. My front end was smashed in and the rear was smashed up to the wheel well. The F150 that hit me was a write-off as well. He pushed his front end up to the wheels. |
|
|
| CryoSlash |
| wow only that much for insurnace on your first car? I go quote 5k a year for a 240sx bone stock, with my parent and with a completely clean driving record... But besides that id say go for the 240. Im sure you can convine him to let you buy one cause you are making very intelligent arguements. Oh and the gas wont be 80/40 a week anymore, expect 100 and 50 :( |
|
|
|
