What percentage of 20 year old cars are on the road?
in [Toyota]
|
From: Vic Smith on 27 Oct 2009 17:45 On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:05:48 -0700 (PDT), m6onz5a <corvair(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >All of those old cars must be hiding somewhere because I hardly ever >see any old ones on the road. That's another problem with getting "real" and useful meaning from registration figures. Where I live in the burbs there's hardly any old cars. My '90 Corsica might be the oldest car of the closest 200 cars around here. I just use it for local trips, and wouldn't take it on the road. But if I go about 10 miles into the north side of Chicago, I can see all sorts of such cars parked on the streets. Instead of 1 in 200, it's more like 1 in 10. I assume that most are used like mine, and not real "highway cars." But where you're at can make a huge difference in the age of cars you see around you. --Vic
From: Vic Smith on 27 Oct 2009 17:55 On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:44:58 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote: >Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in >news:nvlee55gkcllskd40i4ts5rchckrrfh7pj(a)4ax.com: > > >> Steve Scharf posted this link some time back in a discussion about >> longevity. >> http://www.desrosiers.ca/2007%20Update/Documents%20and%20Reports/2007%2 >> 0OBS/Trends%20in%20Vehicle%20Longevity.pdf >> >> It's a bit dated, and GM/Ford/Chrysler is lumped in one bucket, >> "imports" in another. And it's Canadian. >> No raw numbers or fine breakdowns, which always disappoints the >> analyst in me. Because of that I don't really trust it. I don't know >> the "intent" of the report or who put the numbers together, and how >> they did it. Call me the eternal skeptic. > > > >Another thing not covered in that Desrosiers document: Annual mileage. It's >one thing to have a vehicle still registered for the road, but quite >another to have it registered but rarely actually going anywhere. > Yep. And that's not kept on the state reg DB's either. >A lot of much older cars get relegated to second or third-car status and >sit in the driveway a lot. People become unwilling to trust the old heap to >go very far without breaking down. > >How many of those "80% of Toyotas still on the road" are actually still >covering close to the mileages they did when new? We'll never know, I >guess. Agree. My '90 Corisca has about 120k miles, but the last 5k has taken about 5 years to put on. And this year it's gone not more than a few hundred miles. --Vic
From: Tegger on 27 Oct 2009 17:56 Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in news:84qee5tebrut4t6l2eka5roni4umotj2f0(a)4ax.com: > On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:05:48 -0700 (PDT), m6onz5a > <corvair(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >> >>All of those old cars must be hiding somewhere because I hardly ever >>see any old ones on the road. > > That's another problem with getting "real" and useful meaning from > registration figures. > Where I live in the burbs there's hardly any old cars. My '90 Corsica > might be the oldest car of the closest 200 cars around here. > I just use it for local trips, and wouldn't take it on the road. > But if I go about 10 miles into the north side of Chicago, I can see > all sorts of such cars parked on the streets. Exactly the point I just made in another reply. Being registered for the road does not correlate with actual use. > Instead of 1 in 200, it's more like 1 in 10. > I assume that most are used like mine, and not real "highway cars." > But where you're at can make a huge difference in the age of cars you > see around you. Yep. My '91 Integra, still very much a daily driver (with 332,000 miles on it), is often the oldest car around, wherever I am. -- Tegger
From: Vic Smith on 27 Oct 2009 18:17 On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:07:09 -0400, "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote: > >I never said people did not buy trucks for different purposes. Rather, Mr. >White claimed that certain types of people bought particular brands as "fun >trucks", and other brands as "work trucks". Example (paraphrasing): "Nobody >buys Tundras as work trucks." I've explained that I've never seen actual >data to back this up, and as far as I know, neither has anyone else, ever. > Didn't see that. You sensitive about Tundra because it's a Toyota? >I'd like to be proven wrong, but not using anecdotes. > I'll try to remember to ask my kid about that. He works on all kinds of truck suspensions all day, every day. Don't know if he sees many Tundras though. Some of that stuff is regional. But he has no "prejudice" among brands. Though he's a solid GM car fan, he digs the Ford trucks. For professional reasons. But what you'll get from all his experience will be an anecdote. --Vic
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 27 Oct 2009 18:20
"Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:rsree5hqibu7cf8qjo4icvibbue2oeb9g0(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:07:09 -0400, "JoeSpareBedroom" > <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote: > > >> >>I never said people did not buy trucks for different purposes. Rather, Mr. >>White claimed that certain types of people bought particular brands as >>"fun >>trucks", and other brands as "work trucks". Example (paraphrasing): >>"Nobody >>buys Tundras as work trucks." I've explained that I've never seen actual >>data to back this up, and as far as I know, neither has anyone else, ever. >> > Didn't see that. You sensitive about Tundra because it's a Toyota? > >>I'd like to be proven wrong, but not using anecdotes. >> > I'll try to remember to ask my kid about that. He works on all kinds > of truck suspensions all day, every day. > Don't know if he sees many Tundras though. Some of that stuff is > regional. > But he has no "prejudice" among brands. Though he's a solid GM car > fan, he digs the Ford trucks. For professional reasons. > But what you'll get from all his experience will be an anecdote. > > --Vic .....and a very small sample. It would be great if state motor vehicle departments would add a little questionaire to their forms. "How will you use this truck?" 1) Family transportation 2) Towing a sport vehicle or boat 3) Farming 4) Building trades That sorta thing. Just because they could do it. |