Annual Car costs

DonDaddyD

Il Principe wrote:

I'm genuinely horrified by the amount of money people are having to spend. I knew it'd be bad, but not quite this bad.

This is why I have never actually costed up the running costs of a car. I just get on with it and accept its one of those things, a necessary luxury.

veronese68

DonDaddyD wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

I'm genuinely horrified by the amount of money people are having to spend. I knew it'd be bad, but not quite this bad.

This is why I have never actually costed up the running costs of a car. I just get on with it and accept its one of those things, a necessary luxury.

Necessary or luxury? I think many people (myself included) believe the former when it is the latter. I'm surprised at how much our car costs, especially considering how little use it gets and what a tightwad I am.

DonDaddyD

Veronese68 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

I'm genuinely horrified by the amount of money people are having to spend. I knew it'd be bad, but not quite this bad.

This is why I have never actually costed up the running costs of a car. I just get on with it and accept its one of those things, a necessary luxury.

Necessary or luxury? I think many people (myself included) believe the former when it is the latter. I'm surprised at how much our car costs, especially considering how little use it gets and what a tightwad I am.

It's a necessary luxury (an oxymoron).

rhext

Il Principe wrote:

I'm genuinely horrified by the amount of money people are having to spend. I knew it'd be bad, but not quite this bad. Definitely going to stick to hiring/zipcar/taxi for the time being. Zipcars around me are MBW or Golf so assume are ideal for fitting a seat to. Not gonna bother with a base as I need something I can move around. My Mum managed to cart 4 of us around with using seats with a base, and we had no issues. Cars are much safer now as well too.

It's a lifestyle thing: once you have one it's almost impossible to imagine life without. But you need to bear in mind that your partner may end up bearing the brunt of not having one. Different people have different domestic arrangements, but while I might be quite happy tootling off to the supermarket with a pannier to get some bread and a couple of bits and pieces, my wife would struggle to bring back the weekly shop for a family of six(ish) without the people-carrier.... You both need to think carefully: I like to kid myself that I'd find a way without a car, and I'm sure I would, but it would severely curtail the activities of the rest of the family. I'd be quite happy to cycle 40 miles there and back to a rugby match on Sunday, but my 15-year-old second-row forward wouldn't be playing at his best when he got there and might find the ride home a little tiring. And how does the 6-year-old get to judo on a Monday evening? I'm not towing him after I've already done a 24 mile commute?

graeme_s-2

We just have the one car between us (no kids yet), and I only learned to drive a couple of years back. It's handy, but I feel it in no way justifies the cost. Sadly the wife uses it as a magic leaving the house machine. Seriously, if I came home one day to see the car on the drive and my wife wasn't home I'd assume she'd been kidnapped.

il_principe

I'm actually a little depressed by how reliant families (even London-based ones) appear to be on their cars. I seriously hope the boffins manage to make Hydrogen or something else a genuine alternative, or we (ok our Grandchildren) are all gonna be f*cked. I mean to spend between £2k to what, £8k a year just on car ownership is batshit mental. Even £2k is more than most people bring home a month (after tax).

In 1983 petrol was £1.670 a gallon.

In 2012 it's what, about £6? Ok that's not adjusted for inflation, but still... :shock:

fossyant

Il Principe wrote:

I'm genuinely horrified by the amount of money people are having to spend. I knew it'd be bad, but not quite this bad. Definitely going to stick to hiring/zipcar/taxi for the time being. Zipcars around me are MBW or Golf so assume are ideal for fitting a seat to.

We had car seats that didn't have the base despite my car having the new fangled isofix. Maxicosi are some of the best, and can fit face forward (for an older child) or reverse for a younger one.

One thing to note - if using the zip cars - hire one when going off to buy a car seat. Some cars don't fit all car seats when the baby seat is facing backwards - less of an issue with your own car, but make sure you double check.

Much less of an issue when junior can face forwards.

Cars are indeed a money pit. My niece pays more for insurance in one month than I do in a year. She is half my age, and really doesn't drive that far in her car ! Madness !

fossyant

Il Principe wrote:

In 1983 petrol was £1.670 a gallon.

In 2012 it's what, about £6? Ok that's not adjusted for inflation, but still... :shock:

6 years ago I was pouring about £300 into my current car - worked 30-35 miles away with some business travel - it would be nearer £400 per month now - thank goodness I moved.

I put in about £35 a week now, on what I call a 'bad week' - that's a 150 mile trip to the coast and back at the weekend (we do this twice a month at least) and running round the kids - here is where the car (s) get needed with afterschool activity, drama classes, music, sport, scouts, brownies - and that's in a small village, never mind a city.

The good side is, my car looks like a Pro Team support vehicle from May to October - carting the family's bikes to and from the coast - 4 on top !

gabriel959

FYI there are people here in Cambridge that make do without a car, some of them have even got 2 kids. They rely on their bikes and trailers for most of their transport though.

waddlie

We have a 2008 Ford Focus Diesel Estate, which we paid about £9,000 for a while ago.

£2400 per year loan repayments
£2000 per year on fuel
£500 per year insurance and breakdown recovery
£500 per year on maintenance
£30 per year VED.

davmaggs

rjsterry wrote:

Not sold on the need for bases. Our seat is just secured with the seat belt and once you've pushed down on the seat and pulled in the slack like you are supposed to, it doesn't move. Thankfully we've never needed to test it in anger.

+1

The base models ending up using a seat permanently and so that car becomes less useful for other things. Maxi Cosi do baby seats that have the seat belt fed through them, no less secure than any other model.

gabriel959

davmaggs wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sold on the need for bases. Our seat is just secured with the seat belt and once you've pushed down on the seat and pulled in the slack like you are supposed to, it doesn't move. Thankfully we've never needed to test it in anger.

+1

The base models ending up using a seat permanently and so that car becomes less useful for other things. Maxi Cosi do baby seats that have the seat belt fed through them, no less secure than any other model.

I don't know how reliable Which! Magazine is for Baby seats but my understanding is that is not the case, those baby seats are less secure. If you care about security then you will get the ISOFIX version with the base, everything else is a compromise.

il_principe

gabriel959 wrote:

davmaggs wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sold on the need for bases. Our seat is just secured with the seat belt and once you've pushed down on the seat and pulled in the slack like you are supposed to, it doesn't move. Thankfully we've never needed to test it in anger.

+1

The base models ending up using a seat permanently and so that car becomes less useful for other things. Maxi Cosi do baby seats that have the seat belt fed through them, no less secure than any other model.

I don't know how reliable Which! Magazine is for Baby seats but my understanding is that is not the case, those baby seats are less secure. If you care about security then you will get the ISOFIX version with the base, everything else is a compromise.

Sounds like a salesman did a number on you. Actually that reminds me, we were given a pack of stuff at the hospital, it was a poorly disguised marketing exercise. Should the NHS really be helping people market crap to new parents/parents to be?

alan_sherman

Will your kiddie wear a cycling helmet in the car seat?


Isofix vs belt fixed vs permenant fit child car seats debate: The Shimano:Campag:SRAM debate of the mumsnet world :roll:

DonDaddyD

I have a car seat - Recaro young profi something - which I was told won awards. I can categorically state that the seat is more secure, sturdy and safe when attached to the car seat base when compared to having a seatbelt wrapped around it - (even if you push the front car seat back to hold the car seat in place). I would also argue that the base makes it more easier to put into the car and remove.

Under my seat are two hooks, this is what the base (which is heavy) attaches to. The ISOFIX points. The seat is less prone to bouncing up and down or rocking side to side and no amount of seat belt is going to outperform that thing because its weight and the hooks coupled with the weight of the seat and the baby means it is largly fixed in position.

It is not essential but you cannot claim that the seat is as secure if you use a seatbelt. That's just not true.

Jash, if you have the car seat in the front passenger seat make sure you turn off or are able to turn off the passenger airbag. It is illegal to have a carseat in the front passenger seat with a working and operational passenger airbag. Not least of which incredibly dangerous. - I'm sure you know that, but it's important it is said.

bigmat

Il Principe wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

davmaggs wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sold on the need for bases. Our seat is just secured with the seat belt and once you've pushed down on the seat and pulled in the slack like you are supposed to, it doesn't move. Thankfully we've never needed to test it in anger.

+1

The base models ending up using a seat permanently and so that car becomes less useful for other things. Maxi Cosi do baby seats that have the seat belt fed through them, no less secure than any other model.

I don't know how reliable Which! Magazine is for Baby seats but my understanding is that is not the case, those baby seats are less secure. If you care about security then you will get the ISOFIX version with the base, everything else is a compromise.

Sounds like a salesman did a number on you.

No, sounds like he did his research. The majority of "from birth" child seats get appalling safety ratings, particularly for side on impacts. I don't go mad for the health and safety thing, generally have a fairly relaxed approach to life and don't look to wrap my kids in cotton wool, but this was the one thing where I wasn't willing to compromise.

Fair enough, some of us were just chucked on the back seat as kids, didn't even use seatbelts, yadda yadda - I'm happy to take my chances in my life but I won't dick about with my kids' wellbeing.

DonDaddyD

Il Principe wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

davmaggs wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sold on the need for bases. Our seat is just secured with the seat belt and once you've pushed down on the seat and pulled in the slack like you are supposed to, it doesn't move. Thankfully we've never needed to test it in anger.

+1

The base models ending up using a seat permanently and so that car becomes less useful for other things. Maxi Cosi do baby seats that have the seat belt fed through them, no less secure than any other model.

I don't know how reliable Which! Magazine is for Baby seats but my understanding is that is not the case, those baby seats are less secure. If you care about security then you will get the ISOFIX version with the base, everything else is a compromise.

Sounds like a salesman did a number on you. Actually that reminds me, we were given a pack of stuff at the hospital, it was a poorly disguised marketing exercise. Should the NHS really be helping people market crap to new parents/parents to be?

Yes. Little stuff to get you started like nappies, the white bottle clothing conditioner - as that's for babies. Non-biological tablets. Mormula milk. It all helps. And for the people who go into hospital not expecting or not ready to have a baby - so they dont have that stuff, its essential. Also the NHS has been helping to market crap since its conception - Britain has one of the largest pharmacuetical (sp) industries in the World for a reason. Who do you think is there largest customer and who do you think they give the free 'tester' stuff to?

EKE_38BPM

Forget all of this guff about child seats, permanent bases or isofix etc.
Moses basket in the boot area* of a bronze Cortina estate, thats how I got home from the hospital when I was born.





*This may not be true.

mudcow007

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Forget all of this guff about child seats, permanent bases or isofix etc.
Moses basket in the boot area* of a bronze Cortina estate, thats how I got home from the hospital when I was born.





*This may not be true.

im told i was delivered by a stork.....

il_principe

DonDaddyD wrote:

Yes. Little stuff to get you started like nappies, the white bottle clothing conditioner - as that's for babies. Non-biological tablets. Mormula milk. It all helps. And for the people who go into hospital not expecting or not ready to have a baby - so they dont have that stuff, its essential. Also the NHS has been helping to market crap since its conception - Britain has one of the largest pharmacuetical (sp) industries in the World for a reason. Who do you think is there largest customer and who do you think they give the free 'tester' stuff to?

It's pretty unethical if you ask me. Bad enough that people prey on parents like mad anyway, without a state funded institution facilitating things. Even worse that they do it to people when they are emotionally vulnerable. No better way to market than to hook onto people's emotion. Almost as bad as the NHS offering Homeopathy.

CubeMark

Last 12 months running costs for one car:

Petrol (10k miles, 15MPG, £1.40/L) = £4242
Parking = £5 (I avoid carparks)
Brake servo fault = £1000
Turbo replacement, cambelt service, other maintenance = £6700
Brake discs and pads (parts only, self fitted) = £1200
Set of tyres = £880
Insurance = £660
Tax = £270
MOT = £50

Total = £15007

Not surprising that I want to cycle more and drive less.

gabriel959

Il Principe wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

davmaggs wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sold on the need for bases. Our seat is just secured with the seat belt and once you've pushed down on the seat and pulled in the slack like you are supposed to, it doesn't move. Thankfully we've never needed to test it in anger.

+1

The base models ending up using a seat permanently and so that car becomes less useful for other things. Maxi Cosi do baby seats that have the seat belt fed through them, no less secure than any other model.

I don't know how reliable Which! Magazine is for Baby seats but my understanding is that is not the case, those baby seats are less secure. If you care about security then you will get the ISOFIX version with the base, everything else is a compromise.

Sounds like a salesman did a number on you. Actually that reminds me, we were given a pack of stuff at the hospital, it was a poorly disguised marketing exercise. Should the NHS really be helping people market crap to new parents/parents to be?

May be, may be not. You can get a Which! Magazine membership trial for a quid and see for yourself the results. I am not saying Which is without bias, I am only saying the test horizontal and frontal crashes and you will be surprised to see some results for some car seats. At the end of the day it all comes down to the fact that there are some car seats which won't be as safe as others. I have also used other car seats (when on holiday) and ours is the one that "feels" the safest.

bigmat

gabriel959 wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

davmaggs wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Not sold on the need for bases. Our seat is just secured with the seat belt and once you've pushed down on the seat and pulled in the slack like you are supposed to, it doesn't move. Thankfully we've never needed to test it in anger.

+1

The base models ending up using a seat permanently and so that car becomes less useful for other things. Maxi Cosi do baby seats that have the seat belt fed through them, no less secure than any other model.

I don't know how reliable Which! Magazine is for Baby seats but my understanding is that is not the case, those baby seats are less secure. If you care about security then you will get the ISOFIX version with the base, everything else is a compromise.

Sounds like a salesman did a number on you. Actually that reminds me, we were given a pack of stuff at the hospital, it was a poorly disguised marketing exercise. Should the NHS really be helping people market crap to new parents/parents to be?

May be, may be not. You can get a Which! Magazine membership trial for a quid and see for yourself the results. I am not saying Which is without bias, I am only saying the test horizontal and frontal crashes and you will be surprised to see some results for some car seats. At the end of the day it all comes down to the fact that there are some car seats which won't be as safe as others. I have also used other car seats (when on holiday) and ours is the one that "feels" the safest.

I never feel more neurotic than when I'm picking up a hired car seat. "You expect me to put my kid in that?"

Took our own the last time we flew to the States. Handy tip, if there is a Walmart near the airport its actually cheaper to go and buy a carseat than it is to hire one for longer than a week! They supply the sh**test of the sh*t.

DonDaddyD

Il Principe wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Yes. Little stuff to get you started like nappies, the white bottle clothing conditioner - as that's for babies. Non-biological tablets. Mormula milk. It all helps. And for the people who go into hospital not expecting or not ready to have a baby - so they dont have that stuff, its essential. Also the NHS has been helping to market crap since its conception - Britain has one of the largest pharmacuetical (sp) industries in the World for a reason. Who do you think is there largest customer and who do you think they give the free 'tester' stuff to?

It's pretty unethical if you ask me. Bad enough that people prey on parents like mad anyway, without a state funded institution facilitating things. Even worse that they do it to people when they are emotionally vulnerable. No better way to market than to hook onto people's emotion. Almost as bad as the NHS offering Homeopathy.

But the stuff is often given freely to the NHS. It cannot keep it so it passes it on - for free - to the end user. It's just stuff you'll end up buying any way. I found it handy. You do know doctor's surgeries are mostly privately owned so the contract goes to a private customer (Doctor/group of Doctors) who provides an NHS service.

davis

CubeMark wrote:

Last 12 months running costs for one car:

Petrol (10k miles, 15MPG, £1.40/L) = £4242
Parking = £5 (I avoid carparks)
Brake servo fault = £1000
Turbo replacement, cambelt service, other maintenance = £6700
Brake discs and pads (parts only, self fitted) = £1200
Set of tyres = £880
Insurance = £660
Tax = £270
MOT = £50

Total = £15007

Not surprising that I want to cycle more and drive less.

dude. What car is that, and is it made of gold?

DrLex

CubeMark wrote:

Last 12 months running costs for one car:

Petrol (10k miles, 15MPG, £1.40/L) = £4242
Parking = £5 (I avoid carparks)
Brake servo fault = £1000
Turbo replacement, cambelt service, other maintenance = £6700
Brake discs and pads (parts only, self fitted) = £1200
Set of tyres = £880
Insurance = £660
Tax = £270
MOT = £50

Total = £15007

Not surprising that I want to cycle more and drive less.

I'm thinking pre-March 2006 Range Rover.

rhext

Il Principe wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Yes. Little stuff to get you started like nappies, the white bottle clothing conditioner - as that's for babies. Non-biological tablets. Mormula milk. It all helps. And for the people who go into hospital not expecting or not ready to have a baby - so they dont have that stuff, its essential. Also the NHS has been helping to market crap since its conception - Britain has one of the largest pharmacuetical (sp) industries in the World for a reason. Who do you think is there largest customer and who do you think they give the free 'tester' stuff to?

It's pretty unethical if you ask me. Bad enough that people prey on parents like mad anyway, without a state funded institution facilitating things. Even worse that they do it to people when they are emotionally vulnerable. No better way to market than to hook onto people's emotion. Almost as bad as the NHS offering Homeopathy.

You just wait! The world is chock-full of people and organisations who's sole reasonfor being is to extract as much money as they can from anyone they can get it from. And children are one of their most direct routes into your bank account.

davmaggs

gabriel959 wrote:

I
May be, may be not. You can get a Which! Magazine membership trial for a quid and see for yourself the results. I am not saying Which is without bias, I am only saying the test horizontal and frontal crashes and you will be surprised to see some results for some car seats. At the end of the day it all comes down to the fact that there are some car seats which won't be as safe as others. I have also used other car seats (when on holiday) and ours is the one that "feels" the safest.

There's virtually no difference between any of the seats, they are just moulded plastic and some foam (what does that sound like?).
http://www.freakonomics.com/2005/07/09/more-evidence-on-car-seats-vs-seat-belts/

CubeMark

DrLex wrote:

I'm thinking pre-March 2006 Range Rover.

V8 Audi RS6. Zero depreciation now - how cool is that! :P

il_principe

rhext wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Yes. Little stuff to get you started like nappies, the white bottle clothing conditioner - as that's for babies. Non-biological tablets. Mormula milk. It all helps. And for the people who go into hospital not expecting or not ready to have a baby - so they dont have that stuff, its essential. Also the NHS has been helping to market crap since its conception - Britain has one of the largest pharmacuetical (sp) industries in the World for a reason. Who do you think is there largest customer and who do you think they give the free 'tester' stuff to?

It's pretty unethical if you ask me. Bad enough that people prey on parents like mad anyway, without a state funded institution facilitating things. Even worse that they do it to people when they are emotionally vulnerable. No better way to market than to hook onto people's emotion. Almost as bad as the NHS offering Homeopathy.

You just wait! The world is chock-full of people and organisations who's sole reasonfor being is to extract as much money as they can from anyone they can get it from. And children are one of their most direct routes into your bank account.

I get that. But having the NHS pass on marketing guff is not cool.