Extra Vehicle Capacity

[maximilian]

I was reflecting today upon the fact that often people buy cars to handle their maximum requirements, not the typical ones. This mean they spend a lot more money and consume a lot more resources on average. The best solution would be if they bought a vehicle for their usual case and then rented for those few times when they needed more. Perhaps a car company could work out a deal with a car rental agency to offer reduce cost rentals for a period after you buy your car (like six years or 60,000 miles or something) with that strategy in mind. Be a unique approach to car sales, although since the profit margin is better on larger vehicles I doubt they'd go for it.

[bobc455]

Perfect! i wish more people would think this way.

For instance, in a typical conversation with a typical SUV owner, their reason for owning such a behemoth is that they might have to move something big. When I ask how often they take full advantage of all of the space, the answer ranges between seldom and never - but they want it "just in case".

When I ask them why they don't wear a fire suit "just in case", they look at me funny. (okay I don't actually ask this, but you know what I'm saying...)

-BC

[BEEF]

being an SUV owner, maybe we could look at this from a different angle.

instead of renting this vehicle, have it as a 2nd or get one that meets the needs with less damage done.

mine is a honda element which routinely gets mid 20's which isn't a terrific number but an SUV with a 4-cyl is sometimes hard to come by. especially ones that actually have the power to do what they claim.

mine has a class 1 hitch on the back as well (my towing capacity is only 2k lbs). I have also moved three times with it and the people I help move with it are amazed by the space.

depending on how many times you would rent a truck (or other vehicle) it would actually pay for itself to own one as long as you have a place to sit it.

mine isn't completely a single purpose vehicle. I was thinking hard on getting a smart car or a yaris and then the economy took a dump so I am sitting quietly with my paid off cars until all this mess settles. hopefully when the economy recovers I will still have my job and then buy a 3rd vehicle for my wife's everyday commute.

[R.I.D.E.]

I actually have the opposite problem. The Insight has a 385 pound capacity.
My solution is to carry less fuel when my buddy and I travel. He weighs 230 and I weigh just under 200. I can still go 250 miles on half a tank of fuel and our trips are less than 300 miles total.

regards
gary

[maximilian]

Originally Posted by BEEF

instead of renting this vehicle, have it as a 2nd or get one that meets the needs with less damage done.

A perfectly valid strategy if you have the money and parking space. (lack of tone and inflection note: not intended as sarcasm)

[trollbait]

depending on how many times you would rent a truck (or other vehicle) it would actually pay for itself to own one as long as you have a place to sit it.

This all depends on what state you're in. I know with insurance in Pa and NJ that it's usually cheaper to rent than let a third vehicle sit most of the time.

[BEEF]

my solution, though it isn't perfect, is much better than the soccer mom that drives the yukon XLT with her two kids that would fit in my cavalier easily.

I tend to use the capacity of my SUV quite a bit. once a month would be on the conservative side. I could have possibly gotten away with getting a station wagon of some sort instead to do a similar job but I mostly bought it because it is a honda and I intend to keep it until it falls apart. my goal is that the next owner of both of my vehicles will be a junk yard (because all of the usable life has been used out of them).

I think it is a valid point that most SUV drivers could get away with driving much less than what they are. depending on how much you use it for, the 2nd or 3rd vehicle concept may work well.

renting (there again, depending on your level of use) could work out as well.

[maximilian]

Renting as it is done now is kind of a hassle, although renting the delivery truck at Home Depot is pretty easy. I live in the middle of nowhere, so renting isn't much of an option, regrettably. Having a friend who'll lend you their truck once in a while is the local equivalent, I guess.

[BEEF]

yea but someone has to have the truck.

I found myself, quite a few years back, as the friend with the truck. almost everyone has a friend with a truck. I didn't, and then it hit me, I'm that friend with the truck.

[maximilian]

I go with a trailer now. Lower to the ground so it's easier to load than my old truck was. Carries wider things easier as well. I'm finally good at backing up with the damn thing. Reminds me I need to replace its signal lights with LEDs!

[VetteOwner]

lol that remind sme i have to get the brake lights working again on ours, been broken for a year or more...

turn signals and running lights work tho.

most reason i run into people that have SUV's and why is because they like to have it hen they go to the lake one a year.... then i ask why dont u just rent a nice suv to do that? oh but that would be a huge hassle.

lol more like you wouldn't dare get caught driving anything less IMO(how often do you see the tiny 110 lb lady driving the Suburban?)


lol and yes im the friend with the truck too...dont know how many times ive helped people move, load of dirt, load of gravel, load of sand, etc amazing it i belive has a 900 some lb load capacity yet ive put 1100 in it before and was fine lol. still got up to 55mph in a decent amount of time for a 4 banger

[dkjones96]

Not to just start crap or anything, but what ever happened to America being the 'land of the free'? If someone is able to afford a certain lifestyle shouldn't they be allowed to live said lifestyle?

Lets take me for example. At least once a month I go to a mountain biking trail or a hang gliding launch site that I can't get to in a normal car(those are the fun/hard ones) that don't always require 4wd, but it helps a lot. Do I regularly need the ability to tow over 5000 pounds? No. Do I need to have a vehicle that seats 6 and has an 1800lb payload capacity? No.

I am, however, 23 and unable to rent without paying big fees on top of the outrageous price for a days worth of renting an SUV. I'm living over 1000 miles from any family other than my sister who owns a Neon so borrowing a truck or similar 2-4 times a month is out of the question. I'm able to pay for the extra fuel of having a real SUV and still come out under the cost of renting a truck.

My situation at the time of purchase also caused me to get this vehicle. It was between an overpriced economy car with a bunch of potential problems because it's high mileage and economy cars are normally owned by people who hardly even change the oil or getting a low mileage SUV that was obviously taken care of.

[maximilian]

Originally Posted by dkjones96

I am, however, 23 and unable to rent without paying big fees on top of the outrageous price for a days worth of renting an SUV.

The original point of this post was to discuss the merits of a more useful rental system.

As far as people having the "right" to waste, I would agree save for the fact that there are serious hidden costs that our current economic model fails to price accurately. Those neglected costs are borne by us all one way or another. Some examples would be pollution, resource depletion, increased safety risk for those driving smaller vehicles (who are struck by larger ones), traffic congestion caused by low occupancy commuting, etc. It can be a very complicated issue.

[Jay2TheRescue]

Almost everyone I know that own trucks take extremely good care of their vehicles. A truck is a tool, a very expensive tool. People who need trucks to to their work make sure that they are maintained well because if the truck breaks, they can't do their work. I would have chosen the truck as well.

[maximilian]

I'm sorry, but I don't recall anyone arguing against owning a vehicle if there is a legitimate reason for doing so.

[dkjones96]

I do see your point on being wasteful, don't get me wrong. I feel bad for using so much fuel driving back and forth from work and unfortunately I have realized that I don't really care for the motorcycle as much as I thought I did. There is something about the fact that there are no 'small incidents' with a motorcycle and the fact that I just totaled my car a few months ago that really makes me not want to ride the thing anymore.

I'm actually looking for a little Neon or something to drive around and keep the Durango as my weekend vehicle.

[Biffmeistro]

Originally Posted by dkjones96

Not to just start crap or anything, but what ever happened to America being the 'land of the free'? If someone is able to afford a certain lifestyle shouldn't they be allowed to live said lifestyle?

Amen! Seriously! Come out with SOLID proof that SUV's are killing the world, or draining all the world's oil, or even that they are the cause of the price of oil... And maybe we'll talk.

Until then... If you can afford to live that way, by all means, live that way.

[VetteOwner]

Originally Posted by maximilian

I'm sorry, but I don't recall anyone arguing against owning a vehicle if there is a legitimate reason for doing so.

exactly! if they use it for its purpose (ie like dk needing 4wd and ground clearence) then i dont have a problem, or if they do it as a recreation (like jeep people)

its the suburbia USA people who are afraid to go thru a puddle in thier 4wd huge suv thats its designed to do and then some, people who say they need 4wd in the wintertime when it snows. (these are the same retards that 4wd entitles them to go 60mph+ on snow... 4wd or not once you try to stop its all the same)

what when and where does it snow in middle of IL where you need 4wd??? i havent gotten stuck driving around a 2wd s-10 yet or a chevette....nor have my parents in a tarus, ariesK, reliant, capreece, escort, aerostar, ram van, sc2, neon...

SUV's arent killing the world, they just replaced the 12 mpg detriot dinosaurs from the 50-70's nothings changed nothing will, history repeats itself.

just a thought for you guys: if this is America land of the free then shouldn't i be able to buy any car from anywhere without paying ridiculous fees/flatout cant get it? if i want a 80mpg British economy car by golly i should be able to have one right? what about a economy 4 cyl diesel pickup from Brazil that gets 50+ mpg? what if i dont care it didnt pass X safety regulation? Wouldn't it be MY problem if i got into an accident? why should govt step in and say what i can and cant buy? double edged sword isnt it...

[Biffmeistro]

Originally Posted by VetteOwner

just a thought for you guys: if this is America land of the free then shouldn't i be able to buy any car from anywhere without paying ridiculous fees/flatout cant get it? if i want a 80mpg British economy car by golly i should be able to have one right? what about a economy 4 cyl diesel pickup from Brazil that gets 50+ mpg? what if i dont care it didnt pass X safety regulation? Wouldn't it be MY problem if i got into an accident? why should govt step in and say what i can and cant buy? double edged sword isnt it...

I actually completely agree with you on that. But... Too many people don't.

[maximilian]

Not to be a broken record, but the original point of this post was to discuss ideas for improving access to rentals as a way of allowing people to make the most of what they have. We're sort of getting off topic. That said, discussions should be fun, right?

Originally Posted by VetteOwner

Wouldn't it be MY problem if i got into an accident? why should govt step in and say what i can and cant buy? double edged sword isnt it...

Well, if you have a family or become so injured that you wind up on public disability or just have large medical expenses that raise other people's health insurance premiums, then it wouldn't just be your problem, right? Libertarians often don't think things through completely, I've found. I don't expect everyone to take the time to work through all the hidden costs that are out there to the penny or anything, but I do think that they should at least be aware that hidden costs exist. It's admirable when someone makes a sincere and accurate attempt to minimize that waste. Keep in mind that this can be difficult as, for example, hybrids aren't nearly as green as many believe when every little effect is factored in. C'mon guys, the name of the website is "GasSaver.org", not "LiveFreeOrDie.org"!

It reminds me of the raw milk debate. It's been shown pretty conclusively that raw milk has no real health benefits and also that it does in fact pose a greater risk of illness if you consume it. So should it be regulated? If you assume that everyone is perfectly informed and rational, then the obvious answer is "no". The problem is that everyone ISN'T perfectly informed and rational! Something like 10% more people will buy a product that's $59.99 than one that's $60.00. Half the people who buy a product with a rebate never send it in. Air travel is widely viewed as more dangerous than car travel, despite the reverse being the case. We are imperfect biological machines with real mental limitations, just as we have real physical limitations, yet we frequently act as though we don't have these mental flaws (check out the book Predictably Irrational). Imagine if everyone had to independently verify which medicines did more good than bad and that snake oil was still legal to peddle. It'd be chaos. In fact, we don't have to imagine: it WAS chaos. Throw in the fact that parents might give dangerous things to their kids and the issue of personal responsibility becomes much more thorny. There's also a false assumption that we should not impinge on access until there is iron clad evidence that something is harmful, but this is not how rational risk management is done. What matters is the expected harm, which is probability * consequences. If you wait until it is 100% likely that the flood waters will come, it's too late to build the levies. You cannot pretend that uncertainty does not exist. This is the real world and uncertainty must be managed.

Please don't overgeneralize what I'm about to say and take it as a personal attack or anything. I think there's a little confusion between being free to do something and being admired for doing something. People are perfectly free to talk with their mouths full, eat junk food and never exercise, work a job they hate to buy crap they don't need, wear tacky clothing, not bathe regularly, neglect saving for the future, believe in Santa, or just be rude. That doesn't mean other people have to respect them for it. They're free not to!

This thread's never getting back to improving the rental system, is it?

[Biffmeistro]

Originally Posted by maximilian

This thread's never getting back to improving the rental system, is it?

Hehe! Not with the post you just did, no!

[maximilian]

See? Not being able to resist going off-topic: I'm free to do it, but it's certainly not admirable! hehe

[NovaResource]

Something like you suggest does exist in certain areas of the country:
http://www.zipcar.com/
http://www.citycarshare.org/
http://www.phillycarshare.org/
http://www.carsharing.net/
http://www.austincarshare.org/
and dozens more. Do a Google Search on "carshare"

[maximilian]

Thanks! Craigslist has a rideshare section, although it's really basic (just an online classified ad, really).

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by dkjones96

I am, however, 23 and unable to rent without paying big fees on top of the outrageous price for a days worth of renting an SUV.

I was unaware that you could do that. I thought no amount of extra fees made it possible for someone under 25 to rent.

Age milestones...
12: Buying black-market/illegal drugs
14: Age of sexual consent in some states
16: Trusted not to kill others, with any amount of horsepower in vehicles weighing up to 26,000 pounds
18: Allowed to buy cigarettes and guns, drive any kind of vehicle and operate any kind of equipment, tried as an adult for any crime, trusted with military-issued machine guns/airplanes/artillery/trucks/tanks/etc
21: Allowed to drink alcohol
25: Allowed to rent a car

I see that our priorities are in order.

It would probably be good for the economy if age discrimination for car rental was made illegal. How many people get married under 25 and go on a honeymoon in Bermuda or Aruba instead of Florida or Hawaii because they couldn't rent a car in the US?

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by VetteOwner

its the suburbia USA people who are afraid to go thru a puddle in thier 4wd huge suv thats its designed to do and then some

There is a moderately large frost heave (bump in the road caused by expanding ice) on my commute. It's smooth except at its peak and not so large that I catch air going over it or worry about damaging the VW. Imagine my surprise when a person driving a Ford Expedition (SUV built on full-size pickup platform) comes to almost a complete stop to get over it...

I hate that. Speed up, when you fly over it you'll feel it less. Don't slow down, especially in a TRUCK! Big, soft tires and loads of ground clearance...

[dkjones96]

Originally Posted by theholycow

I was unaware that you could do that. I thought no amount of extra fees made it possible for someone under 25 to rent.

Most larger chains say 25 and won't let you rent under that but there are a couple who will let someone in their early 20s rent for business use. Independently owned rental places are usually your best bet for renting a vehicle under 25.

We have a Zipcar system here. They have 3 Honda Civic Hybrids, a Toyota Sienna, and a Mini Cooper. It's a really cool system and if I was a full time student that only worked part-time near the school and such I'd do it in a heartbeat.

[BEEF]

dk,

you are exactly the candidate that I am talking about. you have your SUV which is fine but you use it for your daily commute. if you were to buy a $1500 car for your daily commute, several things would happen.

1-the cost of gas would go down as the car would possibly get twice the mileage
2-your SUV would (in theory) last longer because of less mileage
3-the cost of upkeep would go down because the upkeep on the car should be less than the SUV.
4-if you did want to make the SUV a HP demon, you wouldn't have to worry about mileage on it as you use is secondarily (my new word for the day)

there is the having to put a tag on it and get insurance for it thing. if you play your cards right, it may not cost that much or may even be cheaper. if you have full coverage on the Rango. put the crap car as your primary vehicle with liability only and the Rango as your secondary vehicle with full coverage. it may actually come out cheaper.

just a suggestion.

[VetteOwner]

Originally Posted by theholycow

There is a moderately large frost heave (bump in the road caused by expanding ice) on my commute. It's smooth except at its peak and not so large that I catch air going over it or worry about damaging the VW. Imagine my surprise when a person driving a Ford Expedition (SUV built on full-size pickup platform) comes to almost a complete stop to get over it...

I hate that. Speed up, when you fly over it you'll feel it less. Don't slow down, especially in a TRUCK! Big, soft tires and loads of ground clearance...

oh dont get me started on that, in my area theres a stetch of exremely expensive houses(like $400,000+) and people were driving too fast on thier street so they got the city to put speed humps or traffic calming, its like a huge flat speedbump. the speed limits 30 and you can take them doing that and then some but no people in the tahoes exlorers and whatnot slow down to 15 slowly creep over em and then gun it...

[VetteOwner]

Well, if you have a family or become so injured that you wind up on public disability or just have large medical expenses that raise other people's health insurance premiums, then it wouldn't just be your problem, right?

isnt that true with huge suv's hitting economy cars too?

Imagine if everyone had to independently verify which medicines did more good than bad and that snake oil was still legal to peddle. It'd be chaos. In fact, we don't have to imagine: it WAS chaos. Throw in the fact that parents might give dangerous things to their kids and the issue of personal responsibility becomes much more thorny.

lol dont they still? look at all the drugs that cure a simple thing then have side affects of death...

lol anything can be dangerous to a kid, if it can be put in mouth, over head, be light enough to pick up and throw, fall over, fall on, fall down, etc...its called being a parent and SUPERVISING your kids, not just tell em to go do this while your off in another room or outside doing stuff (untill a certian age when the kid knows right from wrong) speaking of which, they need to bring back paddling i think...getting a detention is like saying you did bad now sit here and think about what you did (which was probably hilarious). now if a threat of getting smacked on the *** with a 1X3 board wellll

There's also a false assumption that we should not impinge on access until there is iron clad evidence that something is harmful, but this is not how rational risk management is done. What matters is the expected harm, which is probability * consequences. If you wait until it is 100% likely that the flood waters will come, it's too late to build the levies. You cannot pretend that uncertainty does not exist. This is the real world and uncertainty must be managed.

speaking of levies and PREVENTATIVE maintenance...(New Orleans 2005 ring a bell? lol)

Please don't overgeneralize what I'm about to say and take it as a personal attack or anything. I think there's a little confusion between being free to do something and being admired for doing something. People are perfectly free to talk with their mouths full, eat junk food and never exercise, work a job they hate to buy crap they don't need, wear tacky clothing, not bathe regularly, neglect saving for the future, believe in Santa, or just be rude. That doesn't mean other people have to respect them for it. They're free not to!

lol and were free to sue whatever the heck we want when we hurt our retarded selves
some of the ones i remember is:

the lady who burnt herself with coffee then sued mc donalds (no crap its coffee its HOT)

burgler who sued the homeowner whos house he was robbing because he cut himself on a broken window that he broke (he won the case)