Do you really know the cost per mile to drive your car?

Did you know 73.6% of statistics are made up?

KenF- really, do you have any evidence of that?

Are you a Subaru Rep. in your retired years or what?

Maybe a lawyer hey...

Rowefast- No, I don't work for Subaru or any other car manufacturer, have never worked in the auto industry. My other car is a Toyota Prius and it's very economical, gets on average 45 miles per gallon consistently. By the way, did you know that fuel is the most expensive thing you put into your car's over the lifetime of ownership?

Ya, I know about your cars, and the fuel thing also, from one of your questions. I think you like stirring things up sometimes and so do I. All in fun...I like seeing what you come up with, they are informative, or they would not hold my interest. How about this one, I bet I spent more money on cigarettes in my life time than in gasoline...or pretty close too...

Obviously inexpensive economy cars cost less to run that luxury cars. I bet my costs are even lower due to the fact that I keep my cars for a long time, maintain them well and perform almost all repairs my self.

Rowefast- are you retired? As for cigarettes, sure, depends upon how much you smoke and they've really gotten expensive over the years. The tax on cigarettes is a disincentive to purchasing and smoking. Just think, how many cities have banned smoking in public establishments and you cannot even smoke closer than 10 to 15 feet to the entrance of these buildings.

Ya, semi retired, and I don't live in a big city, I am at a population of about 17,000 up north in the woods of the U.P. Smoking laws are creeping in here too.

This would vary,depending on what car/truck you drive and how you drive it and keep it serviced,i mostly keep track of mileage that it gets,not at what the cost is to get gas and up keep on it,but things will tear up at one point or the other,and this would increase the cost at any variable time.

Full_of_Regrets- you know, a lot of people think that a Toyota Prius is an "econo-box ". Wow, that's simply not true, the car costs over $30,000 loaded. It's a high tech car, that gets phenomenal mileage. You know, the head of the EPA said that by 2025 the USA will require car manufacturers to build cars to get 45 to 50 miles per gallon. So, I ask you, where's American technology on this and why are we so far behind the Japanese on this? They launched the Toyota Prius in Japan in 1998 and it was launched in the USA in 2001. I still see cars like this on the road today. Really, it's going to take another 10 full years to catch up to the Japanese? Finally, as for doing the repairs yourself, that's hard to do on new cars, they're rolling computers.

Our kids are rolling computers....

For the average mechanic,newer cars are no more complicated than any other,the computer does run the show,but a scanner and a little know how of mechanic,s the issue can be diagnosed,computers are just the brain,and can tell you what issue is wrong,IMO,they put computers in cars to keep the average joe blow from working on them,

T_S_T- yes, I agree with you, computers are in cars to do two things, prevent the average person from working on their cars, and secondly, control more systems effeciently. You know, everything is easy when you know what to do. Unfortunately, not everyone has these kinds of skills. One final thought, the more miles you actually drive your car, the less it potentially costs in relationship to the repairs and maintenance, has zero impact on fuel-efficiency.

Who would buy a Prius without government subsidies? I don't think the gas mileage balances out the high cost without digging into other peoples bank accounts. Other small cars can get the same or better mileage without all the batteries, electric motors and extra weight.

Full_of_Regrets - we purchased the car with absolutely no government subsidy and actually you're incorrect about the fuel savings. Yes, there are a few cars that get 36 to 38 miles per gallon, maybe the Toyota Corolla on the highway, but, its not the Prius that gets almost 50 miles per gallon on the new 2015 models. I know, I rented one and I got 50 to 51 mpg, really! And, the new 2016 is supposed to get 58 mpg. Outside of an all electric car that has range issues, name one other car that gets this kind of mileage. Not even the Volt can do this.

You know talking about gas mileage, here is one for you. When I was younger...working in a service station, a regular customer came threw with a 68 Pontiac what ever (can't remember) with a 6-cylinder motor in it. This car was purchased brand new. The customer had it for about a year and had gotten a recall notice on the carburetor. So we changed it over to the new one supplied by GM. A month later the guy came back to us and said something was wrong as he was not getting his 32 to 38 miles per gallon, that it dropped to 18 mpg. My boss checked it all over and couldn't find anything wrong as the car ran like a top. We figured at the time somebody made a mistake and that carburetor was not suppose to be out on the market. I guess the point being is that they have had the technological knowledge to make cars with good gas mileage for a long time.

Rowefast - that's a very interesting story, almost sounds like an urban myth, if you know what I mean and there's no way to validate the guys story, but, it really sounds like a fish tale to me. Look, don't you think that if there was really such a product on the market by GM, then, they would have marketed that thing to the max. It would have literally destroyed every other car manufacturer out there trying to win sales. But, I certainly enjoyed reading it. You know what I find interesting; and I certainly remember muscle cars from the 60s. Back in the late 60s, we used to make fun of people who had small engines in their cars, you know, a six, or even a small 327 V8. Most of us liked the 396, 400 or 455 engines for power. And, I remember my folks had an Oldsmobile with the 455 V8 and that thing went 0-60 in ten seconds flat. Well, today, my Subaru Outback with the 2.5 Four goes 0-60 in 9.7 seconds. Now, that's technology for you and it gets better fuel mileage too!

Well it happen, and I was there, but it is what it is...Rowefast believe it or not! (chuckle). And aint that the truth on the smaller motor HP. Thats where technology has done us some good.

Rowefast- ok, I don't doubt that you heard the story about the fuel mileage. The reason the 170 horsepower and 170 foot pounds of torque can whip the pants off the old pushrod V8s is that the new engines are a four valves per cylinder, OHC and fuel injection. The older cars from the 60s had old carburetor technology, not as fuel- efficient and didn't have the naturally aspirated engines.

No biggy, and what ever the technical reasons are between old and new, it was still the technology that you are always barking about that got us all that horse power...hey?

Yes, realize that it's not necessarily the extra horsepower, fuel systems, modern transmission, drive systems, etc. The 1968 Oldsmobile had a 455 cubic inch V8, but, the old pushrod technology is not as efficient and even with 300 horsepower, the power doesn't translate into rear wheels as efficiently. OK, see link below, I stand corrected, they both do 0-60 in 9.7 seconds, but, check out the specs on the 1968 http://www.autosnout.com/Car-Performance-Statistics.php? Specs&EditionID=960

The Oldsmobile had a 455 cubic inch V8 or 7.5 litre compared to the 2.5 litre Four on the Outback, pretty amazing.

Rowefast- see this article, this is my car, 2010 Subaru Outback Limited with the 2.5 Four and CVT transmission. http://www.motortrend.com/news/2010-subaru-outback-2-5i- limited-verdict/

I looked at your car, nice...pretty cool sight, I can look back to the 60's I saved the sight for future browsing...

Put modern tires on those old cars and they are much faster. Some of those old cars has so much power they could spin the tires for a full 1/4 mile. That Olds has enough torque to pull the Queen Mary were as the Subaru can barely handle a row boat.

You're welcome, I grew up in the 60s, and remember when the Subaru 360 was first introduced in the USA. It was reviewed by Consumers Reports and rated NOT ACCEPTABLE. It was a junk car and it took 37 seconds to reach 50 mph, really terrible by any standard. What's really amazing is how far Subaru has come today, 46 years later. Almost nobody heard much about Asian cars except Toyota and Datsun ( which later became Nissan ). Honda didn't make its appearance until the mid 70s, even though they were well established in Japan. In fact, Honda made a wonderful roadster in the 60s , but, it was not very common. For many years American car manufacturers treated small cars as cheap throwaway machines, think Pinto, and mostly focused all of their attention on larger cars. Fuel-efficiency became a really big issue with the first oil crisis in 1973 and later in the decade. And, gas prices just went up from there. Even though they have leveled off for now, a little, they always seem to rise up further and further. Back in the 60s, a gallon of gas was 25 to 35 cents and now we think that $2.50 per gallon is a good deal. Over the lifetime of ownership, having a car that gets 45 miles per gallon will cost one third of a car that gets 15 mpg. It adds up. And, the cars from the 60s with those big 400 engines got on average 10 miles per gallon. Even my Subaru Outback with an average 23 miles per gallon combined or 29 to 30 on the road is not bad for a car of its size and performance. Overall, I think people vote with their wallets and if you can find an American car that has the proven track record of Asian cars, I'd consider it. Look, I've had American cars and European cars, and found that Asian cars work better, Toyota and Honda are just as good as Subaru. So, the Asian car manufacturers have been very clever to not only build a solid market share, but, they build substantially good vehicles that are anot excellent value. And, because of this, they continue to have a large loyal customer base. As far as I know, Toyota and Honda continue to be world market leaders.

Full_of_Regrets, I just read your last post, and don't know if you are aware , but, the towing capacity of a Subaru Outback is 2,700 pounds. How much does your rowboat weigh, exactly? Yeah, I know that the Oldsmobile has a lot of torque, so does a pick up truck and by the way, you might as well tow around a fuel tank with you while you're at it, it's lucky to get 10 miles per gallon.

Full_of_Regrets - while you're at it, notice that the Oldsmobile does not have air bags, vehicle stability control, no ABS and a bunch of other safety items. Not good enough even with the modern tires you're suggesting, tell me really, what do you think that will accomplish?

Rowefast, see this, it will give you a good idea on how the CVT transmission works on the road. I like it. https://youtu.be/AnivGjPd8rg

And that is why people love those old cars. As utilitarian as Subaru's are I doubt many people will reminisce about their old 170 hp Subaru 40 years from now.

Full_of_Regrets- Look, I appreciate what you're saying, however, I know that I won't be around 40 years from now and I doubt that you're going to be either, unless, you're much younger than I thought you were. I'm not trying to denigrate old cars, I love old cars, especially as nice as your Jaguar, but, it's a matter of safety, security, and fuel-efficiency for me. Other people's priorities may differ from mine, and then there's the issue of the daily driver. For example, you done want to risk driving your old Jaguar, I appreciate that, and unless you have specific and spelled out insurance on that car, they would never pay you what your collectible car is worth. Do I like my old laser disc collection, you bet I do, but, it's still an old superceded technology, just like VHS, and film cameras. The old cars like the Oldsmobile, 57 Chevy, or even your Jaguar, and it's certainly a great car, does NOT have modern safety equipment, unless you're prepared to tell me that you retrofitted it with ABS, air bags, vehicle stability control, etc. I don't think you did because car collectors keep thing original. Here's an interesting thing for you, while the Outback and your Forrester have the same exact engine size, the Subaru Forester can tow only 1,500 pounds due to the weight distribution of the vehicle. I was surprised to learn that , but, it's true. I know that you're very disappointed in the Forrester and I'm sorry that you feel your stuck with that. My advice to you is keep your vehicle as long as you can and press the dealership to fix the engine to your satisfaction. In a few years, trade it in for another car.

Full_of_Regrets- one more thing, and I realize that this doesn't help your particular car, but, in the most recent Consumers Reports the Subaru Outback was listed in the top ten "most satisfying " cars . And, the Legacy, Imprezza, Crostrek, and Forester all exceeded 80 percent out of 100 for people who said that they would purchase their car again. Take care.

Mark, you sure sound like a politician, are you on the city counsel or the Mayor of your town? Your very good. Also where you live in this country has some affect in what people buy. You come over to my neck of the woods and you'll see lots of big trucks. How many do you see where you live in comparison to the small green leaf cars?

Rowefast- I understand, and I live in Los Angeles. No, I'm not a politician. You know, you're right, we have lots of green cars here, Toyota Prius cars are everywhere and there's so many of them in white, we've sometimes walked back to our car in the parking lot to find 3 or 4 parked right next to ours and we have to look at the license plate to identify our car! Of course, we do see pickup trucks here, you see everything, and many people drive electric cars, of course, electric cars can't realistically leave the city. I've thought about getting one for strictly using in the city, but, the range anxiety is still an issue I'm concerned about. LA is 485 square miles and if you're driving an electric car even in town you have to be mindful of where you go. I think that in the near future, they'll be able to expand the range. The only car that has a decent range is the Tesla and it's way out of my price range. The Toyota Prius is a fine car and since it is a hybrid, you can take it anywhere. We've even driven it across country a couple of times. We averaged 45 miles per gallon even on the road. Aside from Detroit, I can't think of a city with as much car culture than LA. Here in SoCal, it's not unusual to have three cars for a two car family, in fact, for we had three cars for a while, it's really convenient when one goes to the shop. Now that I'm retired, it's not an issue anymore, so we're back to just two cars. LA has one of the highest number of car ownership in the country. And, traffic congestion is the highest in the USA, and because of this, I took a commuter train to the office, I'm lucky that I was able to do that, it doesn't go everywhere, there's a link below for you on the background of LA traffic, interesting read. Thanks for your comments on the last post. http://www.11alive.com/story/traffic/2015/04/01/worst-cities- traffic-usa-los-angeles/70773940/ http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/nobody-walks-in-la-the- rise-of-cars-and-the-monorails-that-never-were-43267593/