Economics of modding
 

Driving 20,000km a year with a 60 mpg car. 1 mpg fuel improvement= $15 saved/year, $75/5 years

Driving 20,000km a year with a 40 mpg car. 1 mpg fuel improvement= $35 saved/year, $175/5 years

Driving 20,000km a year with a 25 mpg car. 1 mpg fuel improvement= $87 saved/year, $435/5 years

Driving 20,000km a year with a 15 mpg car. 1 mpg fuel improvement= $258 saved/year, $1290/5 years

$1.15/L gas

If you drive a thirsty car you can save a lot, if you drive an economical car you would only save a bit. Driving habits and other free changes are good either way.

To get a financial benefit of riding a $1000 bicycle you would have to ride Roughly 10,000km before is saved you $1000/gas. Plus the maintenance for 10,000km would add $200 minimum. So You would have to ride at least 13,333km (8,300 miles) just to break even vs a 30mpg car. I have started riding more often and so far I have done about 200km commuting on my bike. By the end of summer I should have 1500km. It won’t pay for itself for a long time but it is my hobby too so it doesn’t have too. You could quite comfortably half the price and no. of km required.

A lot of us do modifications as a hobby, but if you have a 40 mpg car you have a very limited budget if you want to save money. This doesn’t account for mods that cause advanced wear on the engine/car. E.G stopping/starting car more frequently= need a new starter motor more frequently. If the starter motor costs $300 installed and you use it 5x more than normal the amount you might spend replacing it would never pay for the fuel savings you achieve.

I want to buy a scanguage 2 but my smart already gets 62mpg, the $220Cad price tag would never be worth it. $140Cad ultraguage is better but seemingly never in stock. I could get something like this for $70 cad https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Turb...08.4.11.FASVN3 It wouldn’t save me any money but it would at least pay for itself.

my crapster gets 35 mpg average on a good day and a new starter is 50 bucks :D and it's not hard to change.

but any other mods, like thinner oil seems to not affect the life of a gearbox/ engine really that much, if you maintain oil levels and change often enough.

It'll wear out faster, for sure, but for example a well designed gearbox often outlasts the engine. And engines in general last nowadays very well.

And at higher miles, the car itself will be worn.


Maybe if you want to keep the car, you should not do any radical tests with lubricants.

warm air intake should not really do anything bad in a long run, as many cars have some type of wai system OEM, and still last





I use a 20 buck bluetooth-OBD tool to readout values from my car. I can also delete fault codes= saved money because a shop is not needed.



I don't care about my crapster, the parts to it are so cheap, so i can replace them as needed.

Pistons, rings, syncros, etc.

almost all indvidual parts for my car have prices counted in tens of bucks, not in hundreds :D

Russians are very stubborn with owning a car well beyond their designed life. Lotsa aftermarket.

Don't forget to factor in the other costs of owning a car. Purchase price and or depreciation, insurance and taxes.

Glad to see someone started a thread like this. Hopefully it gains some discussion momentum. What you drive and how much you drive definitely affects how much you can spend on mods and have them pay for themselves. It raises the question, what is a reasonable payback time for a mod? Is it a year, two, the life of the vehicle? Does a mod need to pay for itself at all or is it enough to just have bragging rights that we're getting awesome mileage. Everyone's situation is different so I don't know if there is one right answer. I haven't had this car a year but I only expect to drive it about 5000 km/yr. Any mods I do have to be really cheap if I ever want to see a return, even if the mod gains me 3-4 mpg. I see guys here doing some pretty expensive mods, engine and tranny swaps, major body work. Some of it is pretty awesome stuff and it may even pay off for them. Lots of guys here drive more in a day than I drive in a week. It certainly wouldn't for me. What or how far we mod is really subjective to our situation.
In a way, my car itself is a ecomod. It replaced my van that used three times as much fuel and was useless to me. I've been able to reduce the use of my other car that uses twice the gas by a couple hundred km a month. Finding the right vehicle for your needs, if your current one isn't, may be one of the best mods. As for biking, going out and buying a $1000 bike to save gas may not pay off quick, as you say. But, if you have a bike already, or you buy a $300 bike to save you from driving the 12 mpg gas guzzler, it's payback will be pretty quick.

Yes. And for me, keeping this 1998 Civic as my daily driver since 2001 has been a MAJOR depreciation saver relative to new cars or near-new used cars. Part of keeping my civic cheap to own as it ages has been learning to do all repairs myself. I learned that by modding as well as repairing. My transmission swap cost $300 in parts, but I learned so about my drive train by doing it. So the financial benefits of modding are more complex than merely the cost/savings of a given mod because it is also mechanical training. Long ago, I learned to look at the economics in this holistic way. The key is to retain my dedication to this one car as a financial strategy.

There's a million different ways to look at what's worth it and what works for you. Yes, the bike may take thousands of miles to break even, but what if you replaced a car with the bike. Insurance and registration for my car could easily pay for an entry level bike every year, which is why we just have one car. That's not even considering the health benefits of the bike. That old truck you use to haul whatever once a year may cost you more in registration fees and insurance than renting a truck from Home Depot, but maybe it's worth it to you to keep because it has sentimental value. Being worth it doesn't always mean it's the cheapest or best option, just that it's the one you like.

Here's a spreadsheet I made years ago to compare the cost of doing a mod or upgrading to a higher MPG car. The numbers make more sense if you put the lower MPG/modification cost car on top (usually the current car), but I think it works out the same either way (it'll just be negative). The green cells are the ones you change to fit your scenario.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing (I think you have to save it to your Drive or computer before editing)
http://i.imgur.com/vOKaBjk.png
Here's the formulas for those who can't download it or want to make their own.
http://i.imgur.com/slcxp4l.png

I recently moved from a rural area to an urban one, and my economy tanked. However, I walk to half of the places I shop now, and rather than going through a tank (700-850 miles) every week, it's looking more like a tank every ~3 months. Given that, almost nothing I do to my car will have a positive ROI. However, it's one of my favorite hobbies and I justify my spending on it mostly by the skills I learn and the enjoyment I get.

I don't ever intend to sell my car, but one factor I consider is reversibility of mods, most of which can be pulled off and sold, and reduce the aftermarket value of the car if left in place. For example, when I splice the harness, I prefer spade connectors rather than soldering into it. When I pull a part off, it goes into a big box of spare parts. Even my headlight projector conversion is entirely reversible.

Bicycles are a bit hard to quantify, because it's more than the gas saved. A bike (vs no bike) reduces the number of cold starts and short trips in a car. It expands one's transportation options - in many cases it's faster and more convenient for me to bike, nevermind the economics. It has health benefits, and it removes another vehicle from the roads, which is of benefit to everyone from both environmental and traffic congestion perspectives. And, bicycles too have resale value.

~

Only semi-related, but one of my favorite pictures of MrMoneyMustache:

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/wp-co...e-1024x576.jpg

Now that is a great example of a workout replacing a sitting session while also burning less fuel. Must have been slow riding, though. Would be cool if it were possible to make the trailer axle extendable a couple feet for great stability.

$1000 bike? I don't get that. Either you ride a bike to save money or to get exercise, either way a $300 bike is the way to go. Me I'd go with a older $1000 Honda motorcycle first, then again I buy a $3000 car every 5 years, usually it's still worth $1500 or more resell, had a one time $300 license fee, costs $350/yr to insure and about that much on maintenance. So that's $1000/yr before buying gas. It gets 25 city which is where I mostly drive it which works out to .10/mile more for gas. I could certainly find something cheaper as well but I like AWD, power stuff, A/C and everyday relialibility so I pay 3x what I could up front for a Subaru.

There are other hidden economics beyond the obvious. For example if you modify a vehicle to get better MPG by reducing the load on the engine due to aerodynamic drag, correspondingly you should also expect a bit longer life out of that engine (unless you did something bad like over blocked the engine cooling). Once you start making major modifications where you appreciably increase the range of the vehicle, you can then fill up the vehicle less often which saves you a bit of time at the pump. Especially with pickup trucks, many spend thousands of dollars on aftermarket replacement fuel tanks to increase the range of the vehicle, typically by around 50% or so. Making a vehicle burn 33% less fuel would provide the same range benefit as a 50% larger tank. Depending on your perspective, this convenience factor may be worth something to you.

I think for many though (like me) it is more of a hobby, and there aren’t many hobbies that have any positive ROI at all, most have highly negative ROI.

I drive a (epa calculated) 24.1 MPG car 7000 miles a year and get 33.2 MPG. At my average gas price of $2.05 a gallon, this saves me $163 a year. My starter is super easy to get to, and CAN BE REBUILT for $30-50.

I think so far I am about even with money spent vs returned with only 3 or 4 years of driving. That includes poor ROI mod choices like an expensive deck lid spoiler for my previous accord, and CHEAP gas!

My goal is better fuel economy. Like other car hobbies, I don't expect ecomodding to pay for itself. But it's nice when that happens! My Civic has 237k miles on it and is 26 years old. The starter gets more use than normal. It's the original starter! I did have to replace the solenoid contacts in it, but that was before I started hypermiling.

$1000 bicycle? I have 4 bicycles. They were all free. :D

If you really use your bike, you'll need to spend at least $1k for one. I spent a year commuting on a ~$1000 bike and it needed close to $1k worth of parts a year. I switched to a $10K bike (bought much cheaper at an importer closeout), and it's still original and problem free. If you do high miles, a $300 bike will pretty soon be a $1000 bike.

I don't know why you'd bother with a motorbike when you can get the same economy out of a complete car.;)

Well now if we are talking 5-10k the average Honda 700 rider is getting 66mpg on fuelly, some in the 80's. It's like an Elio they actually make.

From my experience with my last car, most mods can be done for nearly free... I had around $75 in the mods on the Malibu, and that's everything done to it at all... Now, some gains made were from driving habit changes, but I was at around 37-38mpg in a car rated to get 25 combined (DIC was showing 37.1 when salvage truck picked her up)... Normally, I drive 25-30k miles a year, so the mods were paying for themselves quickly enough... From July to November, I had saved around $160 compared to the EPA combined rating...

My car's average mileage is about 13% less than factory specified with only inflating tires and having a better air filter.

and i am not even into modding yet.

Better to spin it, "my average economy driving this car is 13% less than the EPA rates most drivers to get for mixed driving."

Well we have EU specified mileage instead of EPA :)

General Practicality
 

The thread title implies a larger picture.

First, the vehicle.

Assuming a new or nearly new vehicle, the most important consideration is vehicle specification. A married man with wife and children. Longest life at lowest cost with highest reliability. This is the target bullseye.

Through the 1980s from the dawn of the twentieth century, this was a four door sedan. From the 1930s forward it was most likely a straight-6 motor. And by the late 1960s with an automatic transmission, power steering & power brakes with front discs.

Still the most useful template as all else is essentially a variation on this practicality.

After vehicle specification is longevity. It makes the most sense (traditionally) to buy a fleet car. That which is produced in volume, thus can be serviced by nearly anyone, anywhere in North America. Parts availability, new or used, is a given due to high volume and length of production. Plus, drivetrain components and body electrics usually have gremlins worked out early.

Additional capacity is via trailer, (cargo or camping). Versatility is huge.

And unlike a pickup, roadgoing stability is high, not to mention better aero. A lockable trunk provides all weather storage and security. One car that can carry the family trumps any other combination.

And fully enclosed storage (garage) is simplest for one vehicle in a family. (And a requirement for longest life/highest reliability. It, in turn, trumps aero or other eco-modding due to longer life with fewer repairs and higher resale value). One pays a higher price in mortgage or lease agreement due to additional land and construction, but this is also offset by owning fewer vehicles over a lifetime.

Next is records and their use. Charting expenditures, overhead and projected budgets. On a cents-per-mile basis given family use. One must put aside a given amount above and beyond the required outlay to cover maintenance and repairs. These are not last minute credit-financed items (trumps eco driving and aero modding). Vehicle ownership makes for convenience, but it requires proper accounting for future expenditures.

Time out of service and adequate insurance. Budget ahead. Not pay as you go. An expected lifespan of time and/or miles for components and service intervals. (Tire and brake life are constant markers, no different than FE). Same for cleaning to a high standard. Budget ahead and mark the calendar. Regularity is THE thing.

Eco-modding is sort of niche hot rodding. Old project cars. Toys. Not greatly reliable, and maybe not suitable to family conveyance. Pretty much without meaning. However much fun.

Second, the use.

DHS released a report of a study of American driving habits. Boiled down it was that 90% of us go to 90% of the same places 90% of the time. Most choose an address based upon work location versus family "need" (this last is always ripe for evaluation with a cold eye). I tend to look at services first for home address, and work or school last: first is grocery, library, post office, etc. This really is the place that lowest dependence on gasoline is crucial.

The most important sentence I'll write is that Americans have become accustomed since WWII to having gasoline become as important as electricity in their lives, but barely begin to escape ego in dealing with it.

Using the least amount of gasoline isn't central. It's the best use per mile

Corollary to that is in the decision to own one: A change in life's circumstances isn't a "reason" to change vehicles. Vehicles are, in a sense, about family. One may be unmarried, but one does have relatives. (Kith and kin) Too young or too old to drive, too ill or incapable. Or, one may marry and start a family. Vehicle choice precedes this. The historical "best vehicle" template above does not start in an era of affluence. Far from it. (Citing ones personal circumstances is beside the point).

So, "best use per mile" is the practicality of moving family around, and for the longest vehicle life while highly reliable (I'd say 12-years and/or 200k miles as an average), at the lowest cost (which is record keeping, budgeting and planning).

And, as any physician worth his salt will tell you: Want to live to a nice old age? Avoid two things: Don't ever get shot, or be in a serious car wreck.

Vehicle weight & wheelbase still matter for safety in this era of highly engineered cars. Stability peaks with fully independent suspension on a 120" wheelbase. Weight is beneficial up to 4,000-lbs. (Past this overall size brings detriment, as does smaller).

With stability control, anti-lock four-wheel disc brakes, rack & pinion steering, and all of it riding on today's incredibly good tires, this is the post-1980 contribution to the fleet sedan.

So I'd say that for the past dozen years the "ideal vehicle" has been the Mercedes-derived Dodge Charger/Chrysler 300. It meets every goal above. (SUVs are inherently unstable by design, and while minivans an intriguing alternative, a FWD drivetrain means problems of initial expense, repairs, and long term viability. It's a lower duty-cycle envisioned).

Were one to spec this car with an FE concious drivetrain, and apply a reasonable goal to exceed EPA estimates, this would be how to evaluate other vehicle choices.

A V6 2017 Charger is rated at 19-city and up to 30-highway.

I don't quite believe lesser vehicles will pencil out due solely to fuel savings. Use the near-enough current average of $2.50/gl for disagreement. (But have ready all other costs as well). The AAA Club and the car site, EDMUNDS have pages on this subject of cents-per-mile analysis. Past 20-mpg it begins to become difficult to justify the smaller percentage gains.

In short, buying the traditionally best car with cash (for 10-12 years; used or new) keeping it garaged, fully serviced and highly insured beats eco-driving and aero mods alone. An adult 25-years old expecting to be at the wheel for a half century might expect to own 4-5 cars over this period.

Now, reduce all miles travelled on this car (without giving up the convenience of a car; yet no last minute trips to the corner store, etc); continual use of pre-start engine warming, and cold weather heat-exchanger wind blocks, plus avoidance of idling with better understanding of average mile-per-hour . . . and "hyper-miling" plus aero mods are likely without merit (in fact may defy practicality, service issues and component reliability).

I've written in several posts and will repeat here that solo driving to achieve highest mpg is fun, but it's just a stunt. Carnival exhibition.

The real test was always loading the vehicle to maximum capacity and THEN finding highest average mpg. Do that for 10,000 miles (what is needed to become accustomed), and real bragging rights accrue. The tool defines the use. A 5-passenger car -- in essence -- can't be driven economically with less than a full complement of passengers and their luggage. (At least simulate the weight with sand bags, etc).

I applaud every effort made within these pages. But, as an old saying has it, it's the practical car in the hands of the practical man (shows the cow how to eat the cabbage).

I grew up with college-educated, white-collar men -- war veterans -- who'd started driving either at the dawn of the automobile era before WWI, or in the Great Depression. They knew these things in their bones. Practicality rules the scenario. What man can call himself a man otherwise?

.

I had my Renault loaded to it's (unbraked trailer) GCM, and still beat the NEDC figure by 10%. The difference is all accounted for by the aero drag of the trailer, the added weight makes no difference.

This is why I try to explain to people, if you spend $5k-$10k more on a car to get 5-10 more mpg, the car will never pay for itself unless you keep it 20-30 years, and even at that it's gonna need some good repairs by then. Food for thought. Kinda like people who buy a new $8k-$9k motorcycle so they can save on gas. It will NEVER pay for itself if that's the only reason you get it.

Get something cheaper and mod it if need be.

With my Insight significantly overloaded (maybe 1.75x GCM) plus towing a trailer weighing half of what the loaded car weighed, I still beat the EPA combined for my car by 10% over a 1700 mile trip. ;)

Most people on here have kinda middle of the road cars it seems when it comes to FE. I mean, sure there's the Insight and Metro crowds, but there's Civics, Jettas, and such too. Those guys can actually save some money.

I'm still selling my Auto-Stop chips for the G1 Insight at $18 US shipped, with them, because of what they let you do, they might be worth it. But I guess it depends how much you use it and what you were getting before. Coroplast aero is good too but IDK how effective it is. Depends on what you do with it.

Probably the best thing you can do is pump your tires up (free) followed by building grill blocks or a boat tail.

Vehicle choices and the mods we do need to fit our needs and it's not a one size fits all. My needs are much different than someone else's. That said, some options are more economical than others and some mods more worthwhile.
When I bought my Rondo, we were a one car family and we were often making long trips on short notice. I bought the car with the best mileage rating I could find that would still fit everything I needed. I bought it new which, looking back was unwise, but I've driven it for almost 10 years with almost nothing but maintenance. That will eventually change and I know it will never be as cheap overall as my old junkers, but it is far more economical than a truck or SUV. I also have to allow some value to being able to just get in and go without taking my tool box and wondering the whole way if it was going to make it. My mods didn't cost much and I believe have saved me money. OTOH, If I'd spent 10 grand more to buy a Hybrid, I'd be behind even more.
I agree that that the all in costs have to be factored in and buying an expensive car just to save gas is never going to pay. But, while most if us here are tinkerers, for someone who can't fix their own car, a newer car may be justified.
I bought my Echo for a city commuter because it is not only very economical, but it can carry four adults comfortably and has a huge trunk for its size. My mods have paid for themselves quickly (most were free) and I'm not only beating combined EPA in city driving with 3-4 adults in the car, I'm using it as my family car most of the time as well. It uses way less gas than the Rondo in town. If I had a lot of highway driving, my choices might be different, but do what fits. I used to dream of building a hot rod when I was young. As slowmover said, ecomodding is sort of niche hotrodding, except we can actually save more that we spend and have fun doing it.

yeah, like SH@UN said earlier

Instead of getting a modern, economical ATV for a couple thousand bucks for my meek forest trips and other small, easy tasks, i think it's better to get a ol' 2-wheel tractor, even if it's slow as as a snail and drinks heaps of fuel.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/f...as-trailer-jpg

I think your posts are always insightful, but that one should be engraved in stone somewhere. Except with 'hot ridding' corrected. ;)

So I'm past the wife and family part. Four-door driver's doors are too short. This was my solution:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-fr...9-100-0381.jpg

The bike rack integrates two solutions. The bike had $100 in it after both rims had been replaced.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-fr...3-100-0884.jpg

Modification to double the range.

Although the embodied energy was invested 46 years ago and it's the cleanest, most reliable car I've driven; practically, it's too valuable and fragile to flog. so:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-fr...684-dasher.jpg

Where the Superbeetle gets 30mpg burning clear premium, the new weekly driver [should get] 40 mpg burning vegetables. Plus I see an opportunity to mod it with a mild hybrid KERS.

NADA mid-book on the '71 Super is $8100 (it was $7700 six months ago :eek:) with original MSRP of $1,985; on the '79 Dasher, $1325 with the original MSRP of $7,228. They've sort of traded places over the years. :confused:

OT

"Hit rodding" corrected, ha! Some other editing for detail and clarity

Thanks, freebeard. The thanks button wasn't enough.

This site is good for clearing misconceptions. Anxieties.

There's only so much one can do.

After that, if it isn't fun (no one else considers it such), then the checklist stopgaps practical against impractical.

Bummed about Poly Metal. I envisioned it as that stuff the second Terminator robot was built with. I'd just put a scale model of my RV in a wind tunnel, drop a blob of Poly Metal on it, turn on the fan and watch it flow to fill the spaces. Then take off the measurements for fabrication after perfect aero was demonstrated.

A rose by any other name. Ah, well.

.

If one plans to keep the same car for a longer term, might not only justify the cost of certain mods but also eventually go further on other mods that would otherwise be seen as detrimental to resale value. BTW nowadays if I were looking for something that I wouldn't care too much about resale value, my choice would be some random small motorcycle.

Your post reminded me — I took these pictures today on my way back downriver. It's in the Thurston Hills just before the 45mph sign.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-fr...3-100-1148.jpg
http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-fr...4-100-1149.jpg

$650. If 'nowadays [if] I were looking' it would be for something like this. I should find a Metro thread to post it in.

Among the many things I hate in my home country, one of them is the cost of cars. It's impossible to find something decent for that price, and private imports of used cars are a PITA and restricted to 30-year or older cars.

Did you forget that notable eco cars thread? This Metro sure belongs there. Anyway, that's too nice-looking for me to get tempted to ruin it with extreme aerodynamic mods.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...tml#post545342

I chose the efficient cheap beaters thread. MetroMPG thought the finish was shot. The front is definitely worse than the rear. Rusty wheels too, but the interior looked Okay.

I think you'll need to repair any car over 20-30 years. But yeah, 5-10mpg better for $5k-$10k has a long payback period at current gas prices.

At the same time, if gas goes back to $3-4/gallon for a few years, or you find yourself having to drive more, the payback can speed up a fair bit.

I guess another way to look at higher MPG is a hedge against higher oil prices, even if the payback could be decades at the current rate.

By that time, unless it's either some model highly valuable as a collector's item or has some feature that turned uncommon on newer cars that makes it desirable to very specific groups, much of the residual resale value is long gone but it's still often less expensive and energy-intensive to repair an old beater to keep it on the road instead of having a new econobox built and shipped to the dealer.


In an old beater that would anyway be in need of some extensive repairs, that might actually sound like a good excuse to apply some technical updates that would be much likely to extend not just its useful lifespan but also its fuel economy. For those who take modding their cars more as a hobby than as a money-saving trick, it might seem quite reasonable. And there are other priorities that might lead one into ecomodding, such as a wish to decrease the consumption of imported energy resources.

Decrease imports. Politics.

Would be best to not be dependent on that sourced or produced outside of ones polity.

Rare earth minerals, anyone? Integrated circuits?

That list gets long.

A 1962 Dodge Dart wagon with Slant-Six and a bolt-action looking better all the time.

(In turquoise, right, freebeard? That Nevil Shute vibe)

.

.

That's not exactly what I had in mind, but it does seem quite sensible to also rely more on vehicles that can have a higher amount of local/regional content for critical systems. Well, eliminating most of the overseas freight for OEM parts and their due replacements does increase the overall efficiency through the operating life of the vehicle.

Peter DeFazio has been campaigning in his 64 Dodge since, what? 1987?

Eugene Weekly : Best of Eugene : 2011-2012 | eugeneweekly.comPeter DeFazio - The Full Wiki
My 1964 Clark Cortez had the 225, with a carter side-draft carburetor — the same one[s] the used on the 1953 Corvette.

OTOH when I was in high school we went into Salem on Friday nights in a red 1960 Valiant station wagon. It was a friend's fathers. I'd park the bullet-nose Studebaker, and when we got down to the pavement, we'd jack up the front and crank down the torsion bars, then raise it up when we got back.