Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com - View Single Post - If you want economy, you have to pay for it

metromizer · 10-27-2008, 02:31 PM

I wouldn't get too worked up about this guys... sounds like another "Man bites dog..." story to me.

Let me take stab at debunking this as made up sensationalism:

"A 40-year-old male driver would pay an average of $1,704 to insure a 2009 Mini Cooper that gets 37 miles per gallon on the highway, according to a study by Insure.com, an online insurance broker. That same driver would pay only $1,266 -- a difference of $438 -- to insure a Toyota Sienna Minivan, which gets 23 mpg.

Similarly, a Honda Civic compact that gets 36 mpg on the highway costs $412 more a year to insure than a Honda CR-V, a small sport-utility vehicle that gets 27 mpg."

Let see, a Mini Cooper. I drove one of those little go karts through the city of Rochester NY two weeks ago. What fun! I have racing experience, and I'll tell you why that little slot-car should be more expensive to insure... pepole buy them because they are fun, and like spirited driving. There isn't many other reasons to buy one of those, a Corolla gets about hte same mpg and is a lot less expensive. The suspension is tight, the S version corners like it's on rails, and acceleration is downright zippy. I found myself easily going double the speedlimit more than once "It's just a fun car to drive, in or out of traffic" Oh, and it happens to get great mpg "I'll take one in British racing Green, Please..."

The Seinna mini van... Hmmmm... My girlfriend has a Toyota Seinna mini van, so I have some very recent experience with that one, too. Great, utilitarian vehicle, I've put over 10k miles on it. Comfortable for 6 passengers and the V6 has plenty of torque to accelerate on and off the freeway. Here's the thing, when I'm behind the wheel, I drive it like a grandma, just as it was intended. It's comfortable, but lacks any serious cornering ability and I will tell you, I am MUCH less apt to drive the van more than 5mph over the speed limit. The tires squeal if you drive 10% over the advised corner speeds (those little yellow signs on the freeway ramps) Moreover, when I take the van, it's because I have 2 or more of our teenage kids in the car. Unlike 'rippin' through Rochester' in my friend's new Mini, I always drive very cautiously with others in my care.

Civics in NorCal are primarily driven by teens and 20-somthings, also one of the most stolen vehicles around. The Honda CRV is basically a neutered SUV with very low center of gavity (available in front wheel drive only as well as 4x4) You never see them muddy, but more or less in a role of commuter that could go offroad (if we took off the passenger car tires). Again, not the same driver or demographic.

Comparing apples to oranges for the sake of a 'man bites dog' story IMO. The WSJ should know better than to publish garbage like that.

10-27-2008, 02:31 PM	#13 (permalink)
metromizer Master EcoModder Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: NorCal Posts: 451 Thanks: 1 Thanked 40 Times in 26 Posts	I wouldn't get too worked up about this guys... sounds like another "Man bites dog..." story to me. Let me take stab at debunking this as made up sensationalism: "A 40-year-old male driver would pay an average of $1,704 to insure a 2009 Mini Cooper that gets 37 miles per gallon on the highway, according to a study by Insure.com, an online insurance broker. That same driver would pay only $1,266 -- a difference of $438 -- to insure a Toyota Sienna Minivan, which gets 23 mpg. Similarly, a Honda Civic compact that gets 36 mpg on the highway costs $412 more a year to insure than a Honda CR-V, a small sport-utility vehicle that gets 27 mpg." Let see, a Mini Cooper. I drove one of those little go karts through the city of Rochester NY two weeks ago. What fun! I have racing experience, and I'll tell you why that little slot-car should be more expensive to insure... pepole buy them because they are fun, and like spirited driving. There isn't many other reasons to buy one of those, a Corolla gets about hte same mpg and is a lot less expensive. The suspension is tight, the S version corners like it's on rails, and acceleration is downright zippy. I found myself easily going double the speedlimit more than once "It's just a fun car to drive, in or out of traffic" Oh, and it happens to get great mpg "I'll take one in British racing Green, Please..." The Seinna mini van... Hmmmm... My girlfriend has a Toyota Seinna mini van, so I have some very recent experience with that one, too. Great, utilitarian vehicle, I've put over 10k miles on it. Comfortable for 6 passengers and the V6 has plenty of torque to accelerate on and off the freeway. Here's the thing, when I'm behind the wheel, I drive it like a grandma, just as it was intended. It's comfortable, but lacks any serious cornering ability and I will tell you, I am MUCH less apt to drive the van more than 5mph over the speed limit. The tires squeal if you drive 10% over the advised corner speeds (those little yellow signs on the freeway ramps) Moreover, when I take the van, it's because I have 2 or more of our teenage kids in the car. Unlike 'rippin' through Rochester' in my friend's new Mini, I always drive very cautiously with others in my care. Civics in NorCal are primarily driven by teens and 20-somthings, also one of the most stolen vehicles around. The Honda CRV is basically a neutered SUV with very low center of gavity (available in front wheel drive only as well as 4x4) You never see them muddy, but more or less in a role of commuter that could go offroad (if we took off the passenger car tires). Again, not the same driver or demographic. Comparing apples to oranges for the sake of a 'man bites dog' story IMO. The WSJ should know better than to publish garbage like that.