The concept of the "work hack"

Firstly thats the most ridiculous attempt at reverse man-maths I've ever seen. It's nonsensical and doesn't stand up to scrunity. If you can buy the car out of 'some savings' and then 'have better cashflow each month right away' then it follows that you could also not buy the car and transfer the money out of savings you'd have spent on it and also 'have better cashflow each month right away'. It's a an £xk car, it doesnt matter where you get that £xk from, its coming from somewhere and is therefore a huge part of the TCO of the vehicle.

Moving on.

You cannot make or break the case for a car on raw numbers alone. It leaves the subjective element of car choice out of the equation and this is often the most important thing. On numbers you could make a case for running a Citroen C1 as an Airport Taxi instead of a Mercedes S320 CDI for example. Subjectively of course this would be the most ridiculous idea ever.

Lets first cover the concept of a small car like this being a laugh and not that bad for the daily grind. For reasons which don't matter to this thread I found myself travelling 150 miles in a Chevrolet Matiz 1 litre last weekend. It was a complete laugh and I would be lying if I said I didnt enjoy it. But it wasn't a laugh because it was an entirely suitable, decent car. It was a laugh for the opposite reason - because it was hilariously unsuited for the task I employed it for (A round trip to Weymouth from Hampshire). I suspect the same might be said for the first few days of commuting in a town box like a C1. Don't mistake yourself - the C1 will be crap for your purposes. The only redeeming feature is that it will be cheap.

But really, how cheap?

I got 42mpg out of the Matiz on a 20/80 mix of town and long distance A road. It's poor little 1 litre engine was strained at 70mph and often required considerably throttle input simply to maintain speed. It lacked power to such a degree that it almost became difficult to modulate the throttle, whether you hoofed or it accelerated gingerly made almost no difference to the speed at which it accelerated, whereas your Octavia presumably responds well to your inputs and means you quickly find it easy to use only as much throttle as you want and not much more.

You say your commute is 60 miles a day and your car does 35mpg on this route. I am therefore going to assume you'd get 45-50mpg from a C1. We'll do the maths on 45 because it's never a good idea to be too optimistic when costing something like this. I can't remember the exact emissions bracket for the Octavia so will assume it is £210 a year to tax.

Therefore your annual commuting fuel and road tax costs are:

60 * 5 * 4 * 11 (4 weeks leave a year) = 13200 miles per year.

Using the fuel prices of the last petrol station I drove past today gives us 127.9p for unleaded and 130.9p for SUL.

Octavia vRS commuting and tax costs: £2451
C1 commuting and tax costs: £1733

So, assuming you set aside money each month for road tax, your monthly fixed costs for commuting are:

Octavia: £204
C1: £144

There are of course other costs involved in running a car. I'm going to try and estimate those but this will be difficult.

Tyres for the Octavia. 17 inch wheels, £100 a corner for decent enough premium rubber. Lets assume you get 20k out of a set of fronts and 40k out of the rears. So £600 every 40k for tyres. Tyres for the C1. Lets assume 30k out of a set of fronts and 40k out of a set of rears. Equivilent quality tyres will be what, half the price, 50 quid a corner perhaps? So £300 every 60k on tyres for the C1.

Therefore Octavia is 0.015p a mile, C1 is 0.005p a mile. Based on your work mileage this is £66 a year on tyres for the C1 and £198 a year on tyres for the Octavia.

Cars also break. Older cars break more. Neither car is brand new. Lets assume you set aside £200 a year for servicing and repairs on the C1 and £650 a year for servicing and repairs on the Octavia.

So with this new information we arrive at a new annual commuting cost for each car of:

Octavia: £3299
C1: £2000

Monthly..

Octavia £274
C1 £166

So, in terms of monthly cashflow we arrive at a saving of just over 100 quid a month, or 1200 quid a year.

But this isn't the end of the story.

You already own the Octavia. It will cost you £0 to aquire it. You've already done that. You will need to purchase a C1. How much will that be, £3500 for a half decent one? Your Octavia being worth, you reckon, about £1500. So an additional £2000 is required.

After about just under 2 years of this plan, you will be, financially speaking, in the same position as you would have been had you not bothered. Thats the thing about breaking even - its breaking even, not profiting. It doesnt mean that it only takes 2 years to pay for itself. It means that it takes almost 2 years before it starts to save you a PENNY. Only after this period has passed do you begin to genuinelly save £100 every month.

Far less clear cut now, isn't it? And remember we are still on the paper stage. We've not yet put a price on driving and owning a car you like, a car thats comfortable, looks good and offers performance for those occasions when you want it. Whats that worth to you? I calculate that after 4 years of driving the C1 after having binned the Octavia, you'll be £2800 better off than you would have been had you retained the Octavia for 4 years, in terms of cash position. Sounds a lot?

It's not. It's 58 quid a month.

The mistake everyone makes is to ignore total cost of ownership and focus only on visible cost. Fuel is a visible cost. You see it every time you fill up. You feel it. But don't let it dominate your decision making as if its the only cost that matters.

Because it isn't.
 
[TW]Fox;20802942 said:
Firstly thats the most ridiculous attempt at reverse man-maths I've ever seen. It's nonsensical and doesn't stand up to scrunity. If you can buy the car out of 'some savings' and then 'have better cashflow each month right away' then it follows that you could also not buy the car and transfer the money out of savings you'd have spent on it and also 'have better cashflow each month right away'. It's a an £xk car, it doesnt matter where you get that £xk from, its coming from somewhere and is therefore a huge part of the TCO of the vehicle.

I quite liked my man maths, thanks very much! :p

I (and plenty of others, I fully expect) have savings put away - money inherited from a relative on their passing, that kind of thing. Money that isn't for frittering away month by month for living off, but money that I'm quite happy to make a large purchase with - a musical instrument, or car for example.

For arguments sake, I'd not miss £2k out of my inheritance - I'd never really have noticed it was there anyway. All it was doing was sitting and waiting to be used as a house deposit in 10 years time. If I can gain access to this "free money", use it to fund a more economical car purchase and then set up a standing order to put 50% of the savings back into the account each month - then over 4 years, I'd be back where I started, but with that extra 50% extra cashflow each month in the meantime.

If the car purchase comes out of regular current account funds, or has to be put on a credit card however, then it becomes a bit more of a daft idea...

:)
 
I quite liked my man maths, thanks very much! :p

I (and plenty of others, I fully expect) have savings put away - money inherited from a relative on their passing, that kind of thing. Money that isn't for frittering away month by month for living off, but money that I'm quite happy to make a large purchase with - a musical instrument, or car for example.

For arguments sake, I'd not miss £2k out of my inheritance - I'd never really have noticed it was there anyway. All it was doing was sitting and waiting to be used as a house deposit. If I can gain access to this "free money" (in the "unused" sense of the word, rather than the "no cost" sense), use it to fund a more economical car purchase and then set up a standing order to put 50% of the savings back into the account each month - then over 4 years, I'd be back where I started, but with that extra 50% extra cashflow each month in the meantime.

Money is money irrespective of where you keep it or what label you put on it. If you have £2000 you could buy a car with to save you £58 a month net it stands to reason you could also simply use the same amount of money to transfer £58 a month into your current account to acheive the same cashflow goal.

I can see where you are coming from and lots of people think the same, but I think its a really flawed way of thinking.
 
[TW]Fox;20803179 said:
Money is money irrespective of where you keep it or what label you put on it. If you have £2000 you could buy a car with to save you £58 a month net it stands to reason you could also simply use the same amount of money to transfer £58 a month into your current account to acheive the same cashflow goal.

I can see where you are coming from and lots of people think the same, but I think its a really flawed way of thinking.

Maybe, I agree that money is money and I technically, on paper would be worse off - that's indisputable.

Personally though, I'd only use my grandmother's money to fund a large and important purchase. I'd feel uncomfortable just transferring £58 a month of my inheritance to my current account a month and frittering it on groceries, petrol and beer.

The fact that there might be £x000 sat there has diddly squat influence on my day to day life - I just don't count it. If I can draw some benefit on it, pay it back in over 4 years AND be "better off" in the day to day sense in the meantime - then why not?

...of course this is all moot if the OP doesn't have an inheritance ;)
 
Maybe, I agree that money is money and I technically, on paper would be worse off - that's indisputable.

And thats all that should matter. As soon as you start applying emotion to money you will begin to increase the chances of making flawed financial decisions.

Personally though, I'd only use my grandmother's money to fund a large and important purchase. I'd feel uncomfortable just transferring £58 a month of my inheritance to my current account a month and frittering it on groceries, petrol and beer.

But by spending it instead on a car that is nothing but an appliance to save you money which you can then fritter on groceries, petrol and beer is in effect exactly the same thing. It isn't a milestone purchase you can forever attribute to your grandmother. It isn't the realisation of a dream. It isn't an important stepping stone in life (ie, your first house).

It's just a tool to end up a few quid better off each month. If your position generally is as you've described why wouldnt you simply make yourself a few quid better off each month using said money and skip the whole buy a horrible car thing and continue to enjoy a vRS at the same time?

The fact that there might be £x000 sat there has diddly squat influence on my day to day life - I just don't count it. If I can draw some benefit on it, pay it back in over 4 years AND be "better off" in the day to day sense in the meantime - then why not?

Your argument is that its good to have a pile of money somewhere you seemingly 'dont count' and can therefore blow on things and pretend they were free to cancel out any disasterous investment appraisal results you might have carried out because you 'didnt count it anyway'.

I'm not sure we are going to get anywhere rationally debating this :p
 
[TW]Fox;20803276 said:
Your argument is that its good to have a pile of money somewhere you seemingly 'dont count' and can therefore blow on things and pretend they were free to cancel out any disasterous investment appraisal results you might have carried out because you 'didnt count it anyway'.

I'm not sure we are going to get anywhere rationally debating this :p

No - I'm not going to get drawn into being hyper-analytical and sensational about it, there's not a lot of point and we're derailing the OP's thread! Let's go spoil my driving instructor thread instead! :p

It might be slightly irrational and a bit lame to attach emotion to money - but, as you say, a lot of people do. Life's not just about numbers - IMHO anyway.

:)
 
[TW]Fox;20802942 said:
Generally putting stuff into context...

Genuinely appreciate that, thanks :)

Truth be told my car is one of my few vices in life and on the grand scale of things a rather modest vice.
 
Op drove a focus and found it 'meh' yet found excitement in a C1, op has received serious head injury recently.

:p It was fun in the same way that a go-kart is fun despite having bugger all power.

The Focus comment was because I was expecting it to be average and it was average. When I had to take the C1 I was expecting it to be beyond crap but instead found it to be quite capable.

The irony of all of this is that someone in the extended family was looking to get an i10 to do a 100mile a day commute in which had me LOL, they then went on to get an Aygo and I was in hysterics... then I go and consider the same :o
 
Fox,
Excellent job on the maths above.

However, I think you've missed out one thing - depreciation.

At the moment, the vRS is worth £1500. What'll it be worth in 4 years, £1k?

Whereas a C1 worth £3500 will no longer be worth anything near that, in fact it'll probably be worth closer to £1500, thus wiping out £2k worth of 'value' in the overall equation.
 
Fox,
Excellent job on the maths above.

However, I think you've missed out one thing - depreciation.

At the moment, the vRS is worth £1500. What'll it be worth in 4 years, £1k?

Whereas a C1 worth £3500 will no longer be worth anything near that, in fact it'll probably be worth closer to £1500, thus wiping out £2k worth of 'value' in the overall equation.

I worked the maths on the fact that a decent vRS will probably always be worth £1000-£1500, whereas the C1 will depreciate by at least £2000, therefore the cost of ownership capital wise is £2000, which is in my figures.
 
Back
Top Bottom